tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-82415055503518238202015-03-01T17:39:50.132-05:00SchansBlogThanks for coming! I plan to post a lot of interesting articles and comment on a wide range of things-- from political to religious, from private to public, from formal writing on public policy to snippets on random observations.Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.comBlogger4583125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-82507971428878590572015-03-01T17:39:00.003-05:002015-03-01T17:39:50.141-05:00Ravitch's "Reign of Error"<span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">A colleague/friend of mine recommended Diane Ravitch's <i>Reign of Error</i>.&nbsp;</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">Education reform is not high on my reading list these days, but I appreciate book recommendations and Ravitch has been a big stick over the last two decades-- so she's certainly worth a look. <br /><br />I read the first chapter. So far, it's a dog's breakfast of useful stuff, exaggeration, conflation, strawmen, and blech. <br /><br />The most notable, quick problems: she...</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">a.) pounds liberals and progressives (broad categories!) without defining which subsets she's attacking:&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">b.) says that private and charter schools are "deregulated, unsupervised, and accountable";&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">c.) implies that choice necessarily (or likely) undermines democracy;&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">d.) ignores that the status quo is deeply unequal;&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">e.) conflates NCLB with charters/vouchers;&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">f.) is apparently allergic to for-profit involvement;&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">g.) seems to think that our probs in education are largely inner city;&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">h.) ignores family structure/stability in her correct reference to important variables other than schools;&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">i.) conflates charter and voucher in terms of "privatization";&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">j.) acts as if we've had a ton of market reform; and&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">j.) tells us that we're not in crisis, but if we pursue even a bit more market reform (as if we've had a ton already!), then it's akin to a train going off of a cliff. <br /><br />All that said, the book is probably worth sifting through the chaff to get some wheat. But I'm not sure whether I'll get to it soon...</span></span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-81163037206262069132015-02-23T15:47:00.003-05:002015-02-23T15:47:24.556-05:00"not worth the ride"?<span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">This AM, <a href="http://www.wdrb.com/story/28172266/bozich-in-the-end-for-pitino-the-chris-jones-roller-coaster-not-worth-the-ride">Rick Bozich concludes that it was "not worth the ride". </a><br /><br />"Not worth the ride?" I don't know about that. Who could know that, from the outside? Why would you rush to measure that, right now, anyway? <br /><br />Heck, I don't much about nuthin' specific. But I do know about the importance of redemption and second chances. And I know that people often abuse mercy, grace, and second chances. So, I know that mercy is messy and difficult to do in practice. <br /><br />My hope is that sports coaches take chances and strive to develop athletes as athletes and as human persons. You can take great athletes for a year and then wave them on through to the NBA or you can develop their talents. You can take people with nice backgrounds and take credit for what they brought to your program. Or you can "educate"-- moving people from where they were toward where they can be, <br /><br />I wonder how often it happens. And I hope it happens a lot. </span></span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-512422226456946422015-02-18T15:38:00.001-05:002015-02-18T15:38:07.861-05:00Max Boot's "Invisible Armies": a history of guerrilla warfare<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Max Boot has a terrific book on the history of guerrilla warfare.&nbsp;(The term derives from the Spanish for "small war", first invoked to describe Spanish 'irregulars' opposing Napoleon from 1808-1814.) It weighs in at nearly 600 pages-- with 64 chapters of 3-19 pages each. The book is organized into sections-- by era and the most relevant ideology that defines the era. The relatively short chapters and the recurring themes within each section helped a long book be a relatively quick read. It was easy to bang out a chapter or two at a time, while the dominant theme within each section helped to hold it together in my memory.&nbsp; </span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Boot's book reads well-- both the specific accounts and the over-arching narrative. Still, it is necessarily a combination of correlation, causation, and just-so story-- given the project's historical nature, the limited info available, and the subsequent hermeneutical leaps. The challenge is greater going back farther in time and knowing that the winners often get to write their own histories. At times, the stories "smell" better or worse, but overall, his narrative seems reasonable and compelling. </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><b>Specifics</b></span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">I'm not a great student of history. But Boot covers all of the relevant historical episodes I could imagine-- and then some. When one thinks of guerrilla warfare, 20th century battles probably come to mind. But Boot spends a good bit of time on BC and early AD clashes, including the Maccabees, Athenians, King David, Scythians, and Viriathus. He briefly details the first full-scale conventional battle recorded by history in 1468 BC (p. 9) and notes the first recorded empire and its struggles with insurgents (ch. 4's Sargon, 23 centuries before Christ). </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Among many examples of insurgency (and counter-insurgency) in more modern times, Boot covers:</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-the fall of Rome (ch. 7);</span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-the American revolution as a mix of insurgency and conventional warfare (ch. 14);</span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-freedom for Greece (ch. 17), Italy (ch. 18, including Garibaldi's role and even his invitation from Lincoln to fight in the U.S. Civil War [118-119]!), Latin America (brief/passing mentions of Simon Bolivar and Jose de San Martin), and the Irish (ch. 35, incl. the role of Michael Collins); </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-Afghanistan for the 19th century Brits (ch. 24) and as the "Russian Vietnam" (ch. 59);</span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-nationalists (Chiang) vs. communists (Mao) and Japanese in China (ch. 44);</span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-Vietnam for the French and the U.S. (chs. 45, 51, 52);</span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-Cuba and Castro (ch. 53)-- and Che Guevara (chs. 53-54);</span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-the amazing events surrounding Entebbe (ch. 55)-- which were largely supplanted in the public imagination by 9/11; and </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-what he describes as "50 days that changed the world" (ch. 58)-- from the fall of the Shah and the hostage crisis in Iran to Russia's fateful invasion of Afghanistan.&nbsp; </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Boot also describes huge characters/players with whom I had little or no familiarity-- particularly for their success in effective counter-insurgency (military and otherwise): <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Lansdale">Edward Lansdale</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Templer">Gerald Templer</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T._E._Lawrence">T.E. Lawrence</a> (of Arabia), <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orde_Wingate">Orde Wingate</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Lyautey">Louis Lyautey</a>, and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Crook">George Crook</a>. Because their efforts are not as sexy as leaders with big armies doing conventional warfare, history does not remember them nearty as well.&nbsp; </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">A few episodes deserve further comment. First, Boot (ch. 31) notes that the KKK began in the time of Reconstruction, as an insurgency against the victorious "occupying" forces of the North. As Reconstruction pulls back and Southern majority interests are again able to use their own government to thoroughly oppress blacks, we find the emergence of Jim Crow and its formal abuses. <a href="http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?a=947">Anderson and Kiriazis</a> describe the connections between the ideological of Progressivism-- a strain of statism combined with "Social Darwinism" which led to <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2007/12/hoosier-eugenics-horrible-centennial.html">many different forms of eugenics</a> and crony capitalism in political economy-- <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/gabriel-kolko-rip.html">what Gabriel Kolko described as the triumph of "conservatism"</a>. </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Second, in all of Book VI, Boot details the decline of the French and English from WW I through WWII into the post-colonial era. I don't know why I didn't connected those dots earlier. But weakened England and especially France were unable to hold their colonial "empires" together after WWII. In a word, it's why "decolonization swept the world"-- from Israel to Africa to Southeast Asia (322-326). It also explains why the French are prone to imagine that they're a bigger deal than they are on today's world stage. They <i>were</i> a big deal, as late as 75 years ago! Today, they're just another medium-size, reasonably-prosperous country-- albeit with an impressive and memorable history. </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Third, Boot devotes one of his longer chapters to Yasser Arafat (ch. 56). (He covers other opponents of Israel in ch. 60 and notes that Israel is different in that it must defend itself against insurgents [474]). Boot describes Arafat as a nationalist, secular (vs. religious), and abstemious (like Guevara vs. most other insurgent leaders). Arafat did avoid danger, preserving his own life (468), while sending others into danger. (Other subjects were more impressive than Arafat in this regard!) But sometimes, one must make sacrifices, yes? Boot also notes that Arafat follows Israel's "terroristic" path to sovereignty-- in their post-WWII efforts against the British in 1947-- a point I had not known before. One wonders if history would have been any different if Israel had taken a different approach to independence from the British. </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Fourth, Boot covers Al Queda (ch. 61-62), including a nice write-up on Osama Bin Laden's background (517; <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/lawrence-wright-looming-tower.html">see: Looming Tower for tons of detail on this</a>). Boot also details Petraeus' return to Iraq (ch. 63) with the "surge". Well over and above more troops, Boot points to his strategy of putting troops into the communities rather than hunkering down in bases. Boot wraps up the book (ch. 64) by wrestling with whether "global islamist insurgency" is failing or succeeding. </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><b>Big themes</b></span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">First, as an economist, I'm amazed by technological advance and its impact on economy. Boot details its impact on the military-- for both insurgency and counter-insurgency. Generally, counter-insurgency has the initial advantage: as the wealthy can afford luxuries in an economy, so wealthier economies are the first to develop and the most able to afford tech advance in this realm. And oddly, more primitive counter-insurgency has often meant more success-- since they are less prone, themselves, to use conventional approaches (52-55). But after a time, everybody else catches up-- and then things even up quite a bit, especially if the counter-insurgents insist on trying to use conventional warfare as their defense (127-130).&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Boot (xx): "Time and time again, guerrilla warfare seemed to be superseded by the 'new new thing'-- industrial warfare in the 1910s, aerial warfare in the 1930s, nuclear warfare in the 1950s, network-centric warfare in the 1990s. And yet each time it reasserted itself with a vengeance. Since WWII, insurgency and terrorism have become the dominant forms of conflict-- a trend likely to continue into the foreseeable future." Before the 20th century, it was crossbows and then gunpowder. Now, propaganda is a key part of the arsenal. </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">&nbsp; </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Second, there are clear comparisons here to (suicide) terrorism-- both are cheaper/easier; low-probability last-ditch efforts to deal with a much stronger foe in conventional military terms (</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">xxiii</span></span>); more likely to be successful when dealing with (soft) democracies than (hard) dictators; and hoping to attract big help from outsiders (this is reminiscent of 3rd parties in a two-party system!).&nbsp;</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">All of these themes are revisited from <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/strategic-logic-of-suicide-terrorism.html">Robert Pape's work</a>. (I've also blogged on <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/survey-of-arabs-about-iraq.html">data that fits Pape's view</a>-- and the implications of Pape's book <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2008/08/more-on-what-motivates-terrorists.html">here</a>, <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/survey-of-arabs-about-iraq.html">here</a>, and <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/muslims-dont-like-being-ruled-by.html">here</a>. In particular, check out the <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/conservatives-liberals-and-dynamic.html">dynamic analysis of doing this stuff long-term</a> and <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/why-are-they-at-war-with-us.html">Pat Buchanan on the connections to empire</a>.) Oddly, Boot ignores Pope except to try to put distance between them (509, 531). While there are differences-- in particular, what Boot sees as a contemporary emphasis on religion as a primary vs. secondary motive-- Boot is a companion to Pape. </span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"></span><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Boot distinguishes terrorism from guerrilla warfare as "the use of violence by non-state actors directed primarily against noncombatants" vs. "hit-and-run tactics by an armed group directed primarily against a government and its security forces for political or religious reasons" (xxii).&nbsp;</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">A</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">narchists and assassins represent a narrow and extreme form of the guerrilla warfare (Book IV). Chapters 29 and 36 are especially helpful in trying to understand the motives of people in these positions. </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Third, occupying countries are likely to give in to counter-insurgents when the costs become too high. Those benefits and costs include political context (more pain in "liberal democracies" than from dictators-- a la Pape); the geographical distance of "far-off wars"; colonial economic gains vs. national security goals; the use of conscripts (vs. volunteers, mercenaries); and the availability of media for propaganda by insurgents or counter-insurgents. (On the latter, Boot mentions a few uses of American media [e.g., 339].) And he notes that, even </span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">with "success", there can be huge consequences (e.g., Ch. 19). </span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Fourth, Boot spends a lot of time on successful counter-insurgency. Success comes from sheer military might-- or when things get more interesting, from a combination of military action (sometimes ruthless), with degrees of restraint, and strategies to "win hearts and minds". Also important is the need to be perceived as credible to the natives-- that you're "in it to win it" and can do so. Natives are often in a very rough position-- not wanting to irritate either the occupiers or the insurgents.</span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"></span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Fifth, key motivations have changed over time-- with reigning political, religious, and economic ideologies, as well as historical context. "Like everyone else, guerrillas and terrorists are subject to popular moods and intellectual fads." In the 18th and 19th centuries, they were "inspired by liberal ideas" from the Enlightenment. But in the 20th century, anarchism, socialism, and then religion (475-477).</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"> <br /><br />One sees an analogy to the times in which countries became free-- often by insurgencies from occupying countries. The U.S. won its freedom in a time of laissez-faire economics and so, our government was relatively limited. Post-WWII, at the height of Keynesian and optimism about socialism, countries emerging from colonialism embraced big governments-- and disaster has followed.&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><b>Summary</b></span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"></span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">Boot does a nice job of setting the table and then reviewing key principles. In the prologue, we provides "five major points" (xxvi-xxvii). In chapter 10, he lays out "keys to success"; and then he wraps up the book with "12 articles" or principles (557ff).</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">To wrap up, let me lay out the 12 and organizing them a bit:&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-Guerrilla warfare has been ubiquitous and important throughout history. It is not an "Eastern way of war".</span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-It has been over and under-estimated. They still lose a lot but have become more successful since WWII (although perhaps this is an artifact of post-WWII anti-colonialism).&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-Public opinion, media and propaganda have become increasingly important. (More broadly, access to info on wars has changed the landscape for most military activity.) As such, m</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">ass terror does not usually work. And establishing legitimacy is important-- to both sides. </span></span><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;">-Conventional tactics are unlikely to be effective in response. Technology has been a key player. Insurgencies take time and more effective with outside support. </span></span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-61963062963824093182015-02-18T09:47:00.001-05:002015-02-18T10:59:44.354-05:00my review of "The Song"<span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">Tonia and I enjoyed "The Song" last night. After its disappointing box office performance and hearing it get a range of reviews, I was pleasantly surprised. I'd give it 3 or 3.5 stars (out of 4); the film is well-done and really well-filmed. I would only ding it for being a bit stilted in places, a bit too quick/clean at the end, and too predictable throughout to be ideal. It is comparable with Fireproof-- both are must-see movies on the topic of marriage-- but better done, artistically.<br /><br />I'm guessing part of the problem, box-office-wise, was describing the film succinctly and targeting the film at various demographics. The movie is billed as inspired by Song of Solomon. But it ends up being more Ecclesiastes than Song of Solomon-- and perhaps that's part of the challenge in putting the film into a box/category.<br /><br />FWIW: We got mixed advice on watching it with the boys (ages 10-16)-- and invited the older two. They weren't all that interested, so we didn't push. Once we got into it, we were not even opposed to our third son (12 years old) keeping an eye on it. And now, we wished we had pushed at least the older two to watch it with us. <br /><br /><b>Slippery Slopes and Sins of Omission &amp; Commission</b><br /><br />I was most impressed by the subtlety of what turned out to be the film's key moment. The husband is well into the slippery slope of his struggle, but things can still be turned around. He's shown the ability to fend off a lot of temptation, but now he's made a series of unwise choices and things are in a position to get ugly. He's about to be a big-time knucklehead, but the film does not let the wife off the hook. <br /><br />First, she clearly struggles with "leave and cleave" issues. That, by itself, was probably sufficient to avoid or at least head him off the poor path he's walking. She also comes off as insular and (at least a bit) fragile. In any case, her failure to join him on the road-- at all-- is huge and gives her big culpability through a sin of omission. <br /><br />Second, they depict the couple's struggle with physical intimacy in a way that is nicely murky. He makes a special effort to come home briefly in the middle of a long tour, but things don't work out well. Is the problem that he's away too much and then too insensitive when he comes home? Is the problem that she's too cold, doesn't recognize his efforts, and isn't doing anything close to her best? Or is it, as it usually is in these contexts, a good bit of both?<br /><br />Third, there's no evidence of her asking him any "hard questions". Things are obviously not ideal in their marriage; he's on the road a bunch, surrounded by a range of temptations; and he's working closely with an attractive female. Duh; hello. </span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>A Segue on the Importance of Community</b></span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br />A related matter is that nobody seems to be involved in Christian community, living out whatever faith they have as "Lone Rangers". This is *necessarily* less effective, less biblical, and ultimately incoherent in Trinitarian-Christian terms. The band members seem like nice enough people, but there's no relationship portrayed beyond the superficial-- and nobody intervenes. Ol' Dad is a hard worker; he loves his grandson; he's a "tough guy" who wants to make sure his daughter doesn't end up with a loser-- including not settling for merely a "said" faith in her suitors. But his approach to life is also not well-connected with a robust view of Christianity or Christian community. <br /><br />Two other, smaller observations, along the same lines: The chapel is an effective metaphor in this. The couple gets married in (literally) a shell of a church. When things start going south, the husband "finishes" the chapel, completing the shell. It still has the look of a pretty monument and the timing gives it a I Samuel 14:35-ish feel to the effort. Later, he damages the chapel in anger. And then, at the end, he finishes it "properly"-- this time with pews, as if anticipating at least some community. </span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">Second, the film has an us/country/pure vs. them/city/impure feel to it. The full-blown separatism of the "us" looks attractive in places, but is ultimately portrayed as far from the ideal for the couple </span></span><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">and is not ineffective in engaging the world</span></span>-- consistent with City on a Hill's worldview and eschatology.)&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"></span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"></span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Wrap Up</b><br /><br />Back to the husband/wife-- and applications to us-- to wrap this up: How often does "this" happen in real life? I've heard about many cases and seen a few. The dude makes obviously bad/stupid choices-- and we bang on him for being a moron, etc. Meanwhile, the wife's more subtle sins (often of omission) make things unnecessarily difficult and increase the power of the temptations at hand.<br /><br />They're nice enough people on the front end. But without an abiding faith, a robust Christian worldview, progress as disciples of Jesus, and vibrant Christian community, abundant life will be out of reach and they are unlikely to have the wisdom and courage to stand underneath the weight of various temptations. <br /><br />Let "The Song" be good (and full) counsel/warning for us-- in our own marriages and as we help others in our daily lives. </span></span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-48427322362579545212015-02-11T12:24:00.002-05:002015-02-11T12:24:49.392-05:00data on EITC (2014)<span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">The EITC is a tax credit for low-income workers, particularly for heads-of-household [HoH] or married folks with kids. Eligibility for and the amount of the credit are based solely on household composition and earned income. (The latter ignores non-reported income-- at least non-cash benefits from govt, savings/wealth, etc. This arrangement also ignores costs of living and other contexts [e.g., big medical expenses].). </span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br />There are three variables to any welfare program. EITC has another wrinkle which adds a 4th dimension. </span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br />1.) The credit kicks in with every dollar earned-- for those with no children (about $7.66 cents per $100 earned); and for those with children (1 child = $34; 2 children = $40 and 3 or more children = $45).&nbsp;</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">The credit is designed to help those with lower incomes who are trying to raise a family. But it also serves to *incentivize* work, in this range, by subsidizing net wages through the tax code. (And contra the minimum wage, it accomplishes this without making workers more expensive-- and thus less attractive-- to hire.)&nbsp; </span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">2.) EITC's added wrinkle: The credit increases to a maximum that plateaus in certain income ranges:&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-with no kids, a $496 credit for "income" between $6,500 and $8,150 for HoH (or $13,550 if married)</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-with 1 kid, a $3,305 credit for income between $9,700-17,800 (or $23,250 if married) </span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-with 2 kids, $5,460 between $13,650 and $17,800 (or $23,250 if married)</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-with 3+ kids, $6,143 between $13,650 and $17,800 (or $23,250 if married)</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">3.) Then the credit is reduced through a "benefit reduction rate" (BRR); as earned income rises, there is less need for assistance. The BRR is an implied marginal tax rate (MTR)-- your (total) income is reduced to the extent that B is reduced as you earn more (as a tax does). Economists worry about BRR's and MTR's as they get higher, since this reduces the (financial) incentive to work (or in other types of welfare policy-- to save, to get more education, etc.).&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-With no kids, the BRR is the reverse of the credit structure: 7.66%.&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-With 1 kid, the BRR is 16%; with two or more kids, it's 21%.&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">4.) It follows that benefits have a "cut-off point" after reaching a certain income.&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-With no kids, HoH earning $14,590 receive nothing from EITC. </span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-With one kid, the cut-off point is $38,511; with two, it's $43,756; with three or more, it's $46,997. </span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-Being married always adds another $5,430 to the cut-off point.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">Three things to note in closing. First, having one kid makes a big difference. The credit amount rises significantly. Having a second kid is worth another $2,155. #3 is only worth an additional credit of $683. More kids add nothing. Likewise, the cut-off point increases with number of children. </span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">Second, note that the EITC "gives" while payroll taxes (FICA) "take away". (In fact, the EITC began as an effort to offset the regressive and staggering impact of FICA taxes.) The working poor are not hit by federal "income taxes", but they do get nailed by federal payroll taxes on income: 15.3% on every dollar earned-- no credits, deductions, or exemptions-- $1,000's annually from those at the poverty line. (A number of states also enjoy taxing the working poor.)</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">Third, overt taxes on income (e.g., 15.3% for FICA and in Indiana, a 6% MTR) combines with the implicit MTR from losing EITC benefits (typically 16-21%), yielding an MTR of 37-42%). Along with the loss of other means-tested government benefits as income increase, the MTR's are significant. During the peak of the War on Poverty, the average MTR's for the poor were in the 80-90% range-- while individuals can easily have MTR's over 100%. Would you work with an MTR of 80%?</span></span><br /><br />Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-68369064503987915862015-02-04T12:16:00.001-05:002015-02-04T12:16:31.875-05:00post-Civil War political economy and race<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/tir_18_01_08_anderson.pdf">A terrific article in the Independent Review</a>&nbsp;by Bill Anderson and David Kiriazis&nbsp;on race, political economy, and the "rents" (profit ops through govt policy) created by the progressive/regulatory state in the late 19th and early 20th centuries...</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">The article changed the way I think about the post-Civil War era. But it lines up nicely with <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/gabriel-kolko-rip.html">Gabriel Kolko’s work</a> on the Progressive Era as “the triumph of conservatism” and the use of “progressive” legislation for obviously non-progressive reasons under Apartheid—and I already knew Bernstein’s work, the push for eugenics, and the impact of the Flexner Report. (See: <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/different-kinds-of-liberals.html">this link on progressives vs. liberals</a>.)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">So it shouldn’t have surprised me so much!</span><br /><br />Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-74438538856201917112015-02-03T09:54:00.002-05:002015-02-03T09:54:18.908-05:00on Robert Morris' firstfruits and "The Principle of First"<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings></xml><![endif]--><br /><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="&#45;-"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="false" DefSemiHidden="false" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99" LatentStyleCount="371"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footnote text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="header"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footer"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="table of figures"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="envelope address"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="envelope return"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footnote reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="line number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="page number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="endnote reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="endnote text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="table of authorities"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="macro"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toa heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Closing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Signature"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Message Header"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Salutation"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Date"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text First Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text First Indent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Block Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Hyperlink"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="FollowedHyperlink"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Document Map"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Plain Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="E-mail Signature"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Top of Form"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Bottom of Form"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal (Web)"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Acronym"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Address"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Cite"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Code"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Definition"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Keyboard"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Preformatted"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Sample"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Typewriter"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Variable"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal Table"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation subject"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="No List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Contemporary"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Elegant"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Professional"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Subtle 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Subtle 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Balloon Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="Table Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Theme"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Placeholder Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Revision"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Bibliography"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="41" Name="Plain Table 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="42" Name="Plain Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="43" Name="Plain Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="44" Name="Plain Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="45" Name="Plain Table 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="40" Name="Grid Table Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/> </w:LatentStyles></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]><style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;} </style><![endif]--> <br /><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">My comments on a FB thread based on <a href="https://www.southeastchristian.org/sermons/the-principle-of-first/">Robert Morris' sermon on Sunday at Southeast on "The Principle of First"</a>... <br /><br />Chris, thanks for your comment. At first, I thought you were asking a question. Looking a second time, now I’m thinking you meant it rhetorically. Both ways, it’s an excellent comment! If rhetorical, it speaks for itself and builds on what RM said. If a straight-up question, it brings other thoughts to mind, so let me run with that angle. <br /><br />I thought <span style="color: #1f497d;">RM</span> was a little too tight/clean in some areas.&nbsp;At the time, the only thing that bothered me: his claim that the tithe must be given to the local church.&nbsp;(He asserted this and did not support it. I think one can make a decent case for that—indirectly through the implicit and explicit commands to be involved in Christian community. But I don’t see where it’s airtight.) But your question brings up another <span style="color: #1f497d;">important</span> point: the relationship between “all” and the tithe.&nbsp;The NT emphasizes/extends the OT view of stewardship: God owns all (“the cattle on a thousand (figurative) hills”) and we are blessed to be managers of what He’s given. This parallels what Christ did with the Law elsewhere (most famously in Matthew 5 with murder and lust). </span></span></div><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></span><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></span><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span>Along the same lines, my sense of the matter has been that the tithe is "gone" but extended, superseded by a greater “law”. If the tithe is “gone”, what do we do with our freedom? In general, there are temptations to either re-implement the law or to abuse our freedom. I’d guess that there’s more of the latter with money (given the seductions of Mammon as an idol) In any case, the question is what we do with our freedom<span style="color: #1f497d;"> in all areas</span>—and it clearly should be to love God and serve others (Gal 5:1,13). </span></span></span></div><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></span><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></span><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span>In this way, I’m guessing that the tithe is similar to the S</span><span>abbath—that it is made for man, not man for the Sabbath/tithe.&nbsp;And that takes me to Chad’s questions/points. <br /><br />Chad, I did not hear <span style="color: #1f497d;">anything like </span>that. My direct data with him are quite limited—one sermon. (And I can only consider chucking rocks to the extent that I’ve seen big sin, especially from a public figure. See also: Joel Osteen.) If you have clips or quotes, I’d be happy to take a look. Anyway, I can't say I'd be shocked if he had said something like that<span style="color: #1f497d;">. B</span>ut I would be quite surprised, given the inferences I’d draw from SE having him in the pulpit and how careful he was. <span style="color: #1f497d;">(</span>To note, he did talk about "curse" in the Saturday PM sermon, but not in the manner you described. That discussion did not make it into the Sunday AM sermon that is on-line. He was clear on the important point that God does not curse, but says that we are “under a curse”. Read Genesis 3 carefully for the important distinctions in that pivotal story.) And I can imagine how-- if he was not careful elsewhere-- or more likely, if he was read/heard out of context-- that one could sloppily infer <span style="color: #1f497d;">something like </span>that. <br /><br />Part of his argument is that this is "the&nbsp;nature of things"-- who God is, how life is built, etc. And in a Proverbs-like manner, if you do X, then Z tends to happen. For example, if you smoke, you're likely to die earlier. Beyond the material considerations, he would say that you cannot be spiritually blessed to the extent that you live contrary to God’s will and the way that the world is set up. In this context, if I don’t give the firstfruits to the Lord, then the nature of things is that I cannot be blessed in that realm by God, life, etc. <br /><br />RM’s approach reminds me of a similar argument I've made from James 1:5-8 and the analogy of parent/child : God/us. If we ask God for wisdom, while baldly doing our own thing-- especially in the area of our request for wisdom/counsel-- it makes no sense for God to answer that prayer. For example, when I was a single, I had a handful of single friends in the church who sought counsel from me and said they wanted wisdom from God on their future with respect to marriage-- while clearly disobeying what God had already revealed about that area of life. That's incoherent (and insulting). I'm not really asking God's wisdom in that case, but His “opinion”—and that doesn’t make any sense with a reasonable view of God’s character and knowledge. If my kids blow their money and then come ask me for money in the next breath, it ain't gonna happen unless I’m a putz or I decide to extend some hard-core grace.&nbsp;</span></span></span></div><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></span><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></span><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span>I'm also <span style="color: #1f497d;">quite </span>interested in a more-secular version of the same sort of argument. If my approach to life is marked by stinginess toward others, God gets the residual, etc., it seems likely/obvious that I'm more likely to get divorced, not be blessed in all sorts of ways, etc.&nbsp;</span>Extending it to spiritual disciplines, C.S. Lewis said that whatever prayer does with respect to God, we know that it changes us. If I’m the sort of person who prays for enemies—or even just my friends—surely this changes the sort of person we are. Or again extending it to something more secular, to what extent are diets effective because they directly change us or because they indirectly change us by getting us to be intentional in an area where we’ve been slobs?<br /><br />Fascinating stuff!</span></span></div>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-83122305566758166402015-02-02T11:10:00.001-05:002015-02-02T11:10:57.655-05:00sports, emptiness and last night's Super Bowl<span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.becomingminimalist.com/emptiness/">A nice article (h/t: Linda C.)...</a></span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br />Indeed, sports can be empty—but in the same sense that many other things can be empty. The writer of Ecclesiastes has a little something to say on this broader topic—that when pursued from an earthly perspective, even the pursuit of many legitimate things can be vanity. <br /><br />Ironically, I felt profound emptiness in the loss—that (probable) cheaters had won and that Seattle lost on such a badly chosen play. I don’t get all that dramatic too often—and I may not stick to it—but my immediate response (along with all of the crap in football this year) is that I’m “done with it”. <br /><br />In any case, I will go on record to say that football has probably peaked in popularity—at least for a time—with the cheating, wife and child beating, the commissioner's office shenanigans, concussions, fewer kids playing football now, etc. </span></span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-10794451783324834212015-01-26T20:30:00.001-05:002015-01-26T20:31:21.855-05:00Free Community College!<div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><i><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">This essay appeared in newspapers across Indiana...<o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><i><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></i></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><i><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Since it appeared, another observation shows us that Obama is flailing about with this proposal: He's taxing 529 account for college in order to pay for free community college. Nice!</span></i></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">_______________</span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">President Obama has proposed free community college for everybody in the United States. <o:p></o:p></span></span><br /><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">At present, according to the American Association of Community Colleges, there are 6.5 million students in public community colleges. Most of their $31 billion in revenues comes from various levels of government. Although their average cost per student is about $5,000, the average student only pays $950 per year in tuition and fees. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">The proposal is supposed to cost about $60 billion over the next decade. This estimate is probably based on a static analysis—that only these 6.5 million students would attend community college, imposing an additional burden of $950 per student on taxpayers. A more sophisticated prediction would take into account the likely increases in both the number of students and the average cost per student. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Average costs would be expected to increase with additional subsidies and the greater bureaucracy that typically accompanies more government involvement. We’ve seen how massive government subsidies have impacted the overall cost of health insurance and health care in the United States over the last 70 years. Or in the field of education: How about the cost of K-12 education, wholly financed by taxpayers, where we currently spend about $300,000 per classroom of 25 students? <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">There are many other reasons to question the community college proposal. Continuing with the cost side: Why should the average family of four pay $780 in higher taxes to support another $60 billion program? In a time of immense federal debt and tight state budgets, why should this be a strong budget priority?<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">As for the recipients, how will students treat community college if it’s completely free? Will they value the education appropriately and become more responsible individuals? More broadly, is it smart for society to create another “entitlement” program? <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">From the market’s perspective: How will the perception of a community college degree be changed within the labor market? With concerns about a “bubble” in higher education, is it wise to increase government subsidies into that sector? Only 20% of community college students complete a two-year program within three years. Are we imagining that the benefits are greater than they would be? <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Needs-based subsidies for higher education are already in place through Pell Grants. Why is it wise to subsidize community college tuition for all students, even those from upper-income families? As with the minimum wage, the policy is poorly-targeted—in this case, subsidizing all students, rather than just those with fewer means.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Given all of these concerns, the policy proposal seems more political theater and cynical political games, than good (or even serious) public policy. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Interestingly, Governor Pence has proposed increased funding for vouchers and charter schools. Other school reformers are calling for “backpack funding”, which follows each student to the school of their choice (and varies with student needs). With these policy choices, the approach is to finance the decisions of parents and children, rather than sending money to a school and then forcing students to attend that school. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">President Obama takes a similar approach. He could have proposed free community college, but only at the community college closest to each person’s house. Instead, he said that we should empower students to obtain educational services at the community college of their choice. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; line-height: 107%;">Given that we’ve decided, as a society, to finance K-12 education, why not give those parents backpack funding as well—so that those with any level of income have the freedom to choose the school that’s best for their families?&nbsp;</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 107%;"><br /></span></div>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-12416983495945973152015-01-20T08:28:00.002-05:002015-01-20T08:28:25.544-05:00America's most recent two dominant civil religions<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Our nation's civil religions have been the religion of the plurality or even the majority for a long time. Of that pantheon, the dominant deity post-WWII was the "God" of anti-communism, patriotism, and nationalism-- the god instilled in our pledge and on our money. (Of course, followers of the Triune God would say that they see their own God represented on those mediums.)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In recent days, our culture's newly-dominant civil religion has become what Christian Smith termed "Moral Therapeutic Deism"-- <a href="http://www.firstthings.com/article/2015/02/christian-and-countercultural">here defined by Dreher</a> as "a vague, vapid approach to religion, one that can be summed up as: God exists, and he wants us to be nice to each other, and to be happy and successful."</span><br /><div><br /></div>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-70750896233962759112015-01-20T08:15:00.002-05:002015-01-20T08:15:23.440-05:00Heliocentric health insurance! <span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Heliocentric health insurance! Why didn't I think of <a href="http://healthblog.ncpa.org/moving-beyond-the-heliocentric-doctrine-of-health-insurance/?utm_source=newsletter&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=HA#more-39705">this phrase from John Graham</a>?! It's another great, easy way to notice that the "market" for health insurance-- and thus, health care-- has been jacked up by the government.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Why is health insurance an annual thing on January 1? Because it's connected to employment. The chief reason it's connected to employment? Because it's subsidized through employers-- a massive ($100B+ annually), regressive (helps those with more money a lot more) subsidy-- that does what subsidies do: encourage us to get too much of something.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Too much insurance means far too many things covered by insurance-- and all the problems that come along with that. Imagine what car insurance would look like if it strayed from rare, catastrophic events-- to cover door dings, upholstery rips and oil changes.&nbsp;</span><br /><br />Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-60509561436968486272015-01-17T16:17:00.002-05:002015-01-20T09:33:52.646-05:00Washed and Waiting<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">This is my review of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Washed-Waiting-Reflections-Faithfulness-Homosexuality/dp/0310330033/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1421266470&amp;sr=1-1&amp;keywords=washed+and+waiting">Wesley Hill's amazing little book</a>. It is terrific on its direct topic: how to best live as a Christian with a strong homosexual orientation. And as he makes his case, he is very helpful on a range of other topics-- the Church and singles, the importance of friendship, the limits of marriage, and so on.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">The book's title comes from two passages: 1.) "Washed" from the crucial past/present tense in the beautiful, identity-changing I Cor 6:9-11's "You were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our Lord." And 2.) "Waiting" from Rom 8:23-25's "groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies...we wait for it with patience."</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Hill reports that he "had been drawn, even as a child, to other males in some vaguely confusing way, and after puberty, I had come to realize that I had a steady, strong, unremitting, exclusive sexual attraction to persons of the same sex." (13) Hill says that he does not present any of the frequent correlated (causal?) family variables. Moreover, "No amount of spiritual growth seemed to have any effect on my sexual preference." (29)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">His formal intellectual exploration of the topic began in his freshman year of college, when he wrote a paper on it, giving him "the excuse I had been looking for to read" widely (32). And along his journey, he seems to have had many counselors who were wise, patient, and exhorting, encouraging transparency, wrestling, and ultimately, growth. "Be spiritually adventuresome...step out in faith...[don't be] fearful of joining in the adventure the Holy Spirit prepares for you." (38).</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><i>Why write the book?</i> Hill: "I have never found a book I could resonate with that tries to put into words some of the confusion and sorrow and triumph and grief and joy of the struggle to live faithfully before God, in Christ, with others, as a gay person." (14) He describes going into a Christian bookstore and finding books on a "cure" and into Barnes and Noble to look through the Self-Help section. "In neither case did I find anyone writing as if they knew about the paradoxical, pain-filled journey I was on." (123-124)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Sure, there are plenty of books that deny any legitimate homosexual inclinations or see getting people "healed" as the only option. (Hill is open to being "healed", but doesn't think it will happen for him.) Many other books assume that living out a homosexual identity is fine. But Hill believes that living out the identity would be sinful AND that he is called to live with the inclinations but without indulging them (14-15). Or in his words, "how, practically, a non-practicing but still desiring homosexual Christian can 'prove, live out, and celebrate' the grace of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit <i>in homosexual terms</i>." (16; his italics) This will require "the demanding, costly obedience of choosing not to nurture their homosexual desires." (16)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Related to the "why" is the <i>"for whom" (the book is written)</i>. Certainly Hill intends to reach those in the same ballpark. But he also writes for people who are close to those struggling in this arena-- as well as those who might "overhear", from within similar struggles and find grace in the similarities. "The Christian's struggle with homosexuality is unique in many ways, but not completely so." (19) It's not something he emphasizes, but I think the book has a ton of value in this-- over and above its direct goals.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">He also addresses terminology and semantics in his introduction. I like what he says at the end of that discussion: Back to identity and self-identifying, "I've taken care to make 'gay' or 'homosexual' the adjective, and never the noun...being gay isn't the most important thing about my or any other person's identity. I am a&nbsp;<i>Christian</i>&nbsp;before I am anything else. My homosexuality is part of my make-up, a facet of my personality." (22; his italics)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Terminology and semantics are an important consideration-- an over-arching focus of <a href="http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/author.php?id=1040&amp;class=f">Brian Patrick Mitchell in his <i>Touchstone</i> review</a> of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Gay-Catholic-Accepting-Sexuality-Community/dp/1594715424/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1421517747&amp;sr=1-1&amp;keywords=eve+tushnet&amp;pebp=1421517758172&amp;peasin=1594715424">Eve Tushnet's recent book</a> (which seems to be a first cousin on Hill's effort). Mitchell notes the problems of the term "gay Christian" since it elevates another aspect of one's identity to equal footing with one's most important identity, as a Christian. Or perhaps it's easier just to try some other adjectives for <i><b>self</b></i>-identification purposes-- straight Christian, African-American Christian, young Christian, etc.-- to see why any adjective is troubling.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Hill's book is an easy read: three chapters with a mini-biography as an introduction to each. (The bios are his own and those of two Catholic priests, Henri Nouwen and Gerard Manley Hopkins. Nouwen was a renowned writer; Hopkins, a poet. Hill seems to be following in their literary footsteps.)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Chapter 1: What is demanded?&nbsp;</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">His biblical approach to this question is far more complex and nuanced than the usual. (For example, Christians sometimes start with Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19, which turns out to shed little if any light on the topic; and many apologists for same-sex sexual activity seem content to make read passages in Leviticus <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-fundamentalist-creed.html">like a fundamentalist</a>.)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In part, this was driven by dissatisfaction with simpler approaches. "At times, though, for me and many others, the weight of the biblical witness and the church's traditional teaching on homosexual practice can seem rather unpersuasive." (54) "In the end, what keeps me on the path I've chosen is not so much individual proof texts from Scripture or the sheer weight of the church's traditional teaching against homosexual practice. Instead, it is, I think, those texts and traditions and teachings as I see them from within the true story of what God has done in Jesus Christ..." (61)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">What does Hill have in mind-- in addition to the more direct evidences? (He does not include the angle of many other, more-sophisticated cases-- to discuss the arc of Scripture with respect to marriage.) First, "the Christian story promises the forgiveness of sins-- including homosexual acts...right on the heels of the passages that condemn homosexual activity, there are, without exception, resounding affirmations of God's extravagant mercy..." (62)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Second, "the God of the Gospel is known by his threat to our going on with business as usual...God most often seems dangerous, demanding, and ruthless as he makes clear that he is taking our homoerotic feelings and actions with the utmost seriousness." (67) Or quoting another writer: "Are homosexuals to be excluded from the community of faith? Certainly not. But anyone who joins such a community should know that it is a place of transformation, of discipline, of learning, and not merely a place to be comforted or indulged." (67-68) Hill concludes that God's demand for purity-- "far from being a sign of our failure to live the life God wants, may actually be the mark of our faithfulness." (68)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Third, the Gospel is "opposed to our popular notions of personal autonomy and democratic independence...there is no absolute right or unconditional guarantee of sexual fulfillment...no great shock that God might actually make demands of those Christians and their bodies." As a result, the prohibitions "have seemed less and less surprising or arbitrary or unfair the more I've thought about them." (70) This is a common critique of the standard position. Hill ultimately finds it subjective, incoherent, and unpersuasive.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Tushnet puts it this way (h/t: <a href="http://www.firstthings.com/article/2015/02/manual-for-love">Francesca Aran Murphy's review in <i>First Things</i></a>): "The sacrifice God wants isn't always the sacrifice you wanted to make." Of course, this approach begs the question-- but the question must be asked, rather than its answer assumed facilely by either "side" of the debate.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Fourth, "the Christian story commends long-suffering endurance as a participation in the sufferings of Christ". As a result, thinking it's "too difficult doesn't seem as strong or compelling as it once did," (70) Again, imagine the analogies: if long-suffering endurance is never fair, then all sorts of inappropriate behaviors find their way to the rationalization table.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">From there, how then shall he live? Toward the top of Hill's list: take responsibility. "Whatever the complex origins of my own homosexuality are, there have been conscious choices I've made to indulge-- and therefore to intensify, probably-- my homoerotic inclinations." (49) Following in discipleship with Jesus must mean to limit those choices.</span><br /><div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Here, Hill borrows one of my favorite ideas from Lewis on temptation: that "bad people, in one sense, know very little about badness. They have a sheltered life by always giving in." In contrast, Christ never yielded to temptation and thus is "the only man who knows to the full what temptation means." (76) Likewise, some argue that "sex is necessary to be truly, fully alive." But Jesus abstained and is "the measure of what counts as true humanity" (77).</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: large;">A conversation with a wise friend</span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">&nbsp;wraps up Chapter 1. Starting with the premise that our souls precede our lives-- and that God would talk with us about our forthcoming lives-- the friend imagines a conversation (paraphrased): "Wes, I'm going to send you to earth for a few years. You'll have this thorn in the flesh and it will be difficult. But I'll be with you, supplying you with grace for your daily needs, and celebrating the victories when we see each other again." His friend asks whether he would do that. And Wes says yes. The friend's point: You have had that conversation, since you know that God is the author of your life. Hill's conclusion: "Your struggle isn't a mindless, unobserved string of random disappointments...faithfulness is never a gamble. It will be worth it." (78-79)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">All of this broadens nicely to other areas of sexual morality-- or more generally, other categories of morality. (Far too often, conservative Christians reduce morality to a small subset of sins.) "<i>All</i>&nbsp;Christians, whatever their sexual orientation, to one degree or another, experience the same frustration I do as God challenges, threatens, endangers, and transforms&nbsp;<i>all</i>&nbsp;of our natural desires and affections." (64-65; his italics) Then he quotes Robert Jensen: "Every mandate of the law is harder on some, with their predilections, than on others with theirs. In this fallen world, that is always true of law, divine or human...Given the Fall, each of us, with his or her predilections, will be blocked by God's law in some painful-- perhaps deeply painful-- way." (65)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">At times, Hill seems to glorify marriage too much, thinking like a single who has idealized marriage. In a sense, this is an easy and reasonable mistake for a never-married person to make. (Hey, married folk can do it too!) But Hill also notes the likelihood of suffering within marriage, including the idea of "feeling trapped" (72). Hill also uses Wendell Berry's literary example of Jayber Crow with Mattie Keith and her husband (73-74).&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In a word, it's not wise-- on this issue or any other-- to miss what should be obvious points: we all sin; we all have our sinful proclivities and tendencies; and we're called to avoid those-- for our own good and the good of others, through the power of the Spirit, the Word, Christian community, and so on. Homosexuality in particular and sexual morality in general are only a small part of Christian morality.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: large;">Sadly, those in more conservative parts of the Church often have a disproportionate response to homosexuality vs. sex outside of marriage, divorce and remarriage, etc.</span><span style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: large;">&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Chapter 2: Loneliness / Friendship</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Hill describes "how crucial non-erotic friendships with peers of the same sex are in my pilgrimage toward wholeness." (45)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In contrast, he relates a question asked by a friend: "Do you find yourself holding other males at arm's length for fear that if you come to know them deeply and intimately, it will somehow be inappropriate or dangerous or uncomfortable?" (46) Of course, this holds for heterosexual friendships between men and women. (I remember moving from a singles' Sunday School class at church where things were generally comfortable-- to a newly-married class where things were really awkward.)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">What does Hill need/want in terms of individual relationships? "The love of God is better than any human love...[but] I am wired for human love. I want to be married. And the longing isn't mainly for sex...it is mainly for the day-to-day, small kind of intimacy...share each other's small joys and heartaches..." (105)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">More broadly, the challenge to deeper friendship (vs. mere acquaintances and small talk) holds in the Church and otherwise. Hill addresses this to some extent-- and I think his next writing project is on friendship. How can the Church foster friendship? In large part, this is a function of healthy disciple-making. If we follow the Great Commission and make disciples who can make disciples, then (true) friendship inevitably follows.</span><br /><br /> <span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Hill makes an important theological point along the way: "The NT views the church-- rather than marriage-- as the primary place where human love is best expressed and experienced. In the OT, marriage was viewed as the solution to loneliness." (111) Then he quotes a friend who writes: "We must call into question any notion that the supreme expression of human love is found in marriage." (112) He cites II Sam 1:26's love between men, sacrificial love for each other (Jn 15:13), I Cor 13 in the context of spiritual gifts in the church, not marriage; Eph 5's sacrificial love as the model for marital love vs. vice versa; and that marriage will be done away with in Heaven.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Likewise, people often miss that the first Biblical institution is "work" not marriage (in Gen 2). For many people, marriage (and family) will be an important piece of the work to which we are called. But the larger issue is the work, not marriage per se (Eph 2:8-10).&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Along with true friendships, "intentional Christian community" would seem to be a vital part of the equation, especially for the many who are called to be celibate in their contexts. "Throughout much of Christian history, whenever Christians took on vocations of celibacy, they did so most often in community-- in monastic orders, for example...sustained by the rhythms of corporate worship and the mundane tasks of providing for one another's daily needs" (103b). Monasteries are an extreme form of what needs to be fostered in more moderate forms.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Unfortunately, the Church's positive view of singlehood is usually withered or undeveloped. C.S. Lewis referred to this as the destruction of friendship by "coupledom" (h/t: FAM in <i>FT</i>). The challenge: how do we celebrate and support both marriage and singlehood?</span><br /><div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Chapter 3: Shame vs. Pleasing God</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Hill opens with an epigraph from Lewis: "To please God...to be a real ingredient in the divine happiness...to be loved by God, not merely pitied, but delighted in as an artist delights in his work or a father in a son-- it seems impossible, a weight or burden of glory which our thoughts can hardly sustain. But so it is." (131)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Both Nouwen and Hill ask: "Can we who remain homosexually inclined actually please God?" (135) The easy answer should be: "Sure, why not?!" Whether from internal guilt or external social pressures, the answer seems harder to grasp than it should-- and so, the wrestling continues.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">On the implications of this for life here and now: God's "being pleased with us, means that we may be pleased with ourselves in the here and now as we live our daily lives; or, more precisely, we may be pleased that we are pleasing to God." (141) Thus, "what many of us need is a new conception of our perseverance in faith...what it means to live by faith in a world that is fallen and scarred by sin and death..." (144-145)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Hill quotes Hopko (145) who encourages those with same-sex attractions to "accept their homosexual desires as their cross-- as a providential part of their struggle to glorify God...[as] a crucial part of their God-given path to sanctity...both for themselves and potential sexual partners. And they will see their refusal to act out their feelings sexually as an extraordinary opportunity for imitating Christ and participating in his saving Passion." (145)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">And then Hill, again: "My homosexuality, my exclusive attraction to other men, my grief over it and my repentance, my halting efforts to live fittingly in the grace of Christ and the power of the Spirit-- gradually I am learning not to view all of these things as confirmations of my rank corruption...[instead] as what it looks like for the Holy Spirit to be transforming me on the basis of Christ's cross and his Easter morning triumph over death," (145)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Part of this is for Hill to lead the way on how to live out this journey within the Church. As such, Hill quotes Martin Hallett, someone on a very similar path: "our homosexuality is part of our value and giftedness to the church, but homosexual sex is a sin." (17)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Hill concludes the book by comparing his journey to that of the Hobbits in Lord of the Rings (146-148)-- adventurous, something he didn't and couldn't want, but still an amazing opportunity, something of a "grand tale" that's potentially epic. Or maybe it's more mundane than that: "Unlike Sam and Frodo's, my story and the depths of my struggle may never be observed or known by any human watcher. But I can still endure...so long as I have the assurance that my life matters to God".</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Let me wrap this up with a&nbsp;<a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2014/12/is-it-better-to-have-had-something-and.html">blog post</a>&nbsp;from awhile back. Prompted by this set of thoughts as I went through Hill's book, I <a href="https://www.facebook.com/eric.schansberg/posts/859320943881?comment_id=859326323101&amp;offset=0&amp;total_comments=1">posted this on FB and got a few responses</a>.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="color: blue; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><i>With respect to X (something of significant/profound value), is it more challenging to:</i></span><br /><span style="color: blue; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><i>a.) not have had X; to know something of X and its value-- but knows they will not have X.</i></span><br /><span style="color: blue; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><i>b.) not have had X; to know something of X and its value-- and have hope for X but be routinely disappointed about X.</i></span><br /><span style="color: blue; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><i>c.) have had X and to have lost it.</i></span><br /><span style="color: blue; font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><i>d.) have had X and now to have a (far) weaker version of it.</i></span><br /><i><span style="color: blue;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Does it depend on what X is-- e.g., power, freedom, money, sex/marriage, quality of life, etc.?</span></span></i><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In my mind, A is the easiest.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: large;">B is more difficult than A and speaks to a state of mind in how we handle our circumstances.</span><span style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: large;">&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: large;">C receives sympathy at least for awhile. Those in D deserve a lot more sympathy.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Perhaps my testimony is of some use: As a celibate single until my marriage at age 30, the challenges in the realm of sexuality have been far greater now than when I was single. And I'd guess that they have become far greater than they would have been had I remained single. But then again, who knows? The mystery of all of this calls for humility, empathy, deep friendship, transparency, a desire for obedience, a dependence on the Spirit, and a belief in a benevolent God who will meet us where we are, even in our sacrifices and suffering.&nbsp;</span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-12148067699204215092015-01-14T13:11:00.001-05:002015-01-15T13:18:02.637-05:00Boyhood (the Movie) with a small nod to C.S. Lewis<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Tonia and I enjoyed <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1065073/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Boyhood</a> last weekend. In a word, it's an interesting film-making idea that is well-executed, with content that will be especially interesting to parents of teens and pre-teens. The focus is Mason moving from age 6 to 18-- thus, "Boyhood"-- but his Mom, the various fathers, and older sister Samantha get a lot of on-screen time too.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">The movie is <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1065073/parentalguide?ref_=tt_stry_pg">rated R for language and adult content</a>. (The teens are shown using alcohol and drugs, but not shown having sex.) It is very much an adult movie-- or perhaps it'd be good for parents with older teen children as an opportunity for discussion.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">The movie seems quite real/accurate on how "good" but "worldly" parents would raise children. First, the movie underlines the importance of sacrificially loving one's children-- far beyond the hollow idea of love as largely sentiment. In particular, the love of Olivia (the mother, played by Patricia Arquette) often requires courage and sacrifice. Sure, she struggles here and there, but she has a tough life! In contrast, the three fathers have a difficult time balancing love of children with their own selfish pursuits and personal demons.<br /><br />Second, there is little in the film (explicitly) on religion. The exception: the step-grandparents are devout and kind. Their daughter (Mason's step-mom) seems like a jewel. And they give the boy his first Bible-- something with which he seems to be unfamiliar. Christianity is treated respectfully, but as something alien to him. The alternative? The children are raised, to the best of Olivia's ability, through her love, to be loving to others. They engage in a variety of "worldly" activities-- and the mom is not too upset with any of that.&nbsp;</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">This is akin to what Christian Smith describes as the predominant religion among younger people today, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moralistic_therapeutic_deism">Moral Therapeutic Deism</a>: a feeling/love-oriented, broad sense of morality (especially opposed to overtly harming others) where God is absent or not particularly active.&nbsp;</span><br /><div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Third, the film illustrates the inherent limits of single-family households, especially those with limited resources. (The biological father, played by Ethan Hawke, is a secondary parent for much of the movie. The mom gets little help from extended family and has little/no apparent community/church support). Some of the mom's tolerance for her kids' activity may well be her inability to police them effectively-- and thus, a need for her to pick her battles. In any case, these kids tend to "grow up" quickly-- for better and for worse-- getting more freedom and responsibility.&nbsp;</span><br /><div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In this, the movie is a glimpse into one of the more positive subsets of the lower-income and lower-middle-class world depicted by Charles Murray in <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-other-america-is-coming-apart.html">Coming Apart</a>. There is a lot of family instability-- and all the problems that can attend. But by the end of the movie, the Mom is educated and has a good job; the kids are going to college; and better things seem in store for them too.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Some other themes in the movie:&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">1.) I was struck by the central role of food/meals in the movie. Perhaps it was simply a movie-making construct for conversation-- a useful context for convenient dialogue. Or perhaps Richard Linklater, the director, was making a statement about the importance of fellowship and the relationships that develop around shared meals (see: Acts 2, 4)-- in order that truer forms of love can be embodied.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">2.) <b>Spoiler alert for this point: </b>The three fathers are interesting. First, the biological father is a mess early-on, loving the kids in a somewhat well-intentioned, but shallow and ultimately selfish manner. The Mom has to play defense against the poor example that he sets and the poor sort of love (e.g., gifts/bribes) that he offers. As the movie progresses, he increasingly "gets it". He eventually marries a wonderful woman (raised by the Christian parents noted above)&nbsp;and becomes more "productive" as a parent.&nbsp;</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Second, she marries one of her former professors. He seems a little too slick early on-- and then devolves into a drunken and abusive jerk, from whom she flees. Third, she marries one of her own college students-- a former soldier who seems to have things together. He seems like a pretty good guy, but then struggles a lot with the dynamics/difficulties of a mixed family and the doldrums of everyday life at a mundane job.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">The two later men/marriages seem quite different, but are ultimately quite similar. The former man is much older; the latter is younger. The former is a professor; the latter is a prison guard. The former is an easy-going lech; the latter has a military background. But at the end of the day, they're quite similar. The professor forces the boy to get a crew cut; the prison guard thinks he knows it all. The professor likes his wine; the prison guard likes his beer.&nbsp;</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">There at least two lessons here: a.) age and profession don't matter much to character; and b.) humbly and fully engaging life is preferable. Even though life is messy and challenging, arrogance is a joke-- and escapism through substance abuse is no answer. (The teens use alcohol and drugs, but it's portrayed as recreational rather than escapist.)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">3.) <b>Small spoiler alert: </b>When Mason is heading off to college, it causes an existential crisis for his mom. She's worked hard to raise her kids. She got an education and has a good career. But what's it all worth? What's the point? (Just prior to this scene, she's approached by someone in a restaurant whom she had successfully encouraged to move from menial labor to college. This should have been an inspiring moment for her, but it doesn't last long if it registers at all.) In this moment of crisis, we don't get an answer from her-- or especially, any hope that she will find an answer. The moviegoer knows what should be obvious to her, but isn't: pouring her life into students and her children is a beautiful thing and a valuable legacy.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">A few things on how the movie is filmed:&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">1.) The premise is simple but amazing: Linklater follows a few actors over 12 years-- when Mason (played by Ellar Coltrane) ranges from 6 to 18 years old. So, Mason is acting in a role, but he's playing the part of a 6-year old at age 6, 7 at 7, and so on. We see the actors age. We see the times and the culture changing, in "real time" of a sort. It's also interesting to imagine how much film they shot-- and then edited, given the change in story lines, current events, etc.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">2.) Tonia noticed that the filming is largely as if the cameras are not there. The filming is not intrusive; the actors are not playing to the camera. In this, the style of the filming is also more real-life.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">3.) Linklater uses hair and cars as tools in his cinematographic bag. Changes in haircuts are his preferred method to signal to the audience that we've entered a new year/vignette. But beyond that, hair is metaphor: Samantha's hair changes as little as her character. Mason's hair changes quite a bit and tends toward the longer side, except for the time when his step-father mandated a buzz cut. The car as metaphor is a bit more obvious: the father starts with a GTO and ends up in a mini-van!</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">4.) <b>Another spoiler alert</b>: There's not much to spoil! There are no big events.&nbsp;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boyhood_(film)">This link</a>&nbsp;provides a synopsis of the storyline, but there's not much to it. I think that's the point-- that much of life is mundane and predictable in a broad sense. Sure, things change-- but all in all, life is largely run-of-the-mill stuff.&nbsp;</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Even so, we (esp. Tonia) kept waiting for "something (bad) to happen". This reminds me of <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2015/01/lewis-on-bad-readers-and-bad-writing.html">C.S. Lewis on bad readers and bad literature</a>-- here, that bad movie-goers and bad movies insist on something big happening. The most extreme version of this is "big dumb fun"-- movies with a lot of action, especially with mayhem and things blowing up. But even milder forms of this are cousins of the same approach: we often need/want something big to happen, for a movie to hold our interest.&nbsp;</span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-30233717647472168082015-01-14T13:09:00.002-05:002015-01-15T13:22:12.396-05:00Lewis on bad readers and bad writing<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">I picked up&nbsp;<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Experiment-Criticism-Canto-C-Lewis/dp/0521422817/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1420751857&amp;sr=1-2&amp;keywords=experiment+in+criticism">Lewis'&nbsp;<i>Experiment in Criticism</i></a>&nbsp;after reading about it somewhere. It's an interesting little book-- largely, an exercise in trying to describe "bad" readers to determine "bad literature", rather than the more-common and somewhat-more-subjective effort to judge "bad literature" directly.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">"Bad taste is, as it were by definition, a taste for bad books. I want to find out what sort of picture we shall get by reversing the process. Let us make our distinction between readers or types of reading the basis, and our distinction between books the corollary." (1)</span><br /><div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In defining bad readers or readers with bad taste, Lewis notes common (but not universal) traits of "bad readers" (2-3). They...</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">a.) don't read anything twice;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">b.) read as a last resort and quickly abandon it when any alternative arises;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">c.) show no sign that reading changes their consciousness or thinking in any significant way; and&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">d.) have the same approach to other forms of art (4). For a recent film that does not focus on "events", see <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2015/01/boyhood-movie-with-small-nod-to-cs-lewis.html">my review of Boyhood</a>.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">The bad reader really likes events: "They never, uncompelled, read anything that is not narrative, I do not mean that they all read fiction. The most un-literary reader of all sticks to 'the news'." (28) Beyond that "they demand swift-moving narrative...As the unmusical listener wants only the Tune, so the un-literary reader wants only the Event...he wants to know what happened next." (30) They enjoy events that are exciting; they want "inquisitiveness aroused, prolonged, exasperated, and finally satisfied"; and they want use literature "to participate in pleasure or happiness" vicariously (36-37).&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">All that said, Lewis makes clear that there's nothing wrong with fiction, narrative, or literature that covers exciting events. These readers are "unliterary not because they enjoy stories in these ways but because they enjoy them in no other." (38)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Lewis notes that bad readers are NOT highly correlated with "the rabble"; it's not necessarily a function of education or income class (5). This state can change over time; people can move between bad and good readers (6). Lewis is also not talking about "solemn" readers-- those who read, but not in a way that changes them (12). <a href="http://schansblog.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-fundamentalist-creed.html">Fundamentalists of various stripes</a> would fit here-- they are quite "solemn", but not "serious".</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Bad reading can stem from treating the work as raw material for other purposes (7). "The first demand any work of any art makes upon us is surrender...the many <i>use</i> art and the few <i>receive </i>it...I do not mean by this that the right spectator is passive. His also is an imaginary activity; but an obedient one." (19; italics in original)</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Worse still are some "literary critics"-- "who attends to [words] far too much and in the wrong way....treat language as something that 'is' but does not 'mean'; criticize the lens after looking <i>at</i>&nbsp;it instead of <i>through</i> it...If the mass of people are un-literary, he is anti-literary." (35-36; italics in original)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">These are dangers in my line of work (and vocation), where much reading is for professional (or other derivative) reasons. For example, in preparing a book on ministry and discipleship, my recent survey of the literature could easily have devolved into the sort of reading that Lewis is critiquing. Along these lines, I always try to read a range of books-- from what I must read (in various arenas) to what I would like to read (ranging from light to profound/moving).</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Finally, I like what Lewis says about escapism (68-71): "There is a clear sense in which all reading whatever is an escape. It involves a temporary transference of the mind from our actual surroundings to things merely imagined or conceived...The important question is what we escape to...Escape then is common to many good and bad kinds of reading. By adding -ism to it, we suggest, I suppose, a confirmed habit of escaping too often, or for too long, or into the wrong things, or using escape as a substitute for action where action is appropriate."&nbsp;</span></div>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-25888004097317966392015-01-14T10:13:00.001-05:002015-01-14T10:13:13.719-05:00Goodman's survey on ObamaCare's impact on fast-food employees<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/john-c-goodman-how-obamacare-harms-low-income-workers-1420760457">From Goodman's WSJ article</a> on his December survey of 136 fast-food&nbsp;restaurants/franchisees with about 3,500 workers...</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">About half of the employees had been “full time” (as defined by ObamaCare: 30+ hours per week). The potential cost to the employers: about $7 million per year.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">"But by the time the employers took advantage of all their legal options they were able to reduce their cost to less than 1% of that amount. The first step was to make all hourly workers part time...By the end of 2014, 58 employees had crossed the line to full-time status and were eligible for mandated health insurance in 2015...The companies in the survey offered to pay the full premium for the mini-med plans, in order to make that alternative more attractive. If employees choose the bronze plan it costs the employers about six times as much. The result: Only one of the 58 remaining full-time employees enrolled in a bronze plan; the rest will likely be in MEC plans."</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">And then there are the families of these workers, which are not covered by employers! Goodman found premia that were 70% of monthly wages for a bronze plan and 25% of wages for a mini-med plan. If not bought, the family ineligible for premium subsidies on an insurance exchange and faces a fine on April 15th.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">"To recap: Almost half the workforce of these restaurants was involuntarily reduced to part time and has less income as a result. These employees have also lost the opportunity to have the coverage they most prefer: mini-med plans that pay for medical care they are most likely to need. Out of 3,500 employees, only one...got the kind of insurance that the architects of the Affordable Care Act wanted everyone to have."</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">This is impressively bad, even for the government. Congrats!</span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-80250121670204547072015-01-13T07:31:00.003-05:002015-01-13T07:31:49.507-05:00on incidental parenting and the maturity of children...<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">1.) Until this year, I carried Joseph upstairs to start his school days. I incidentally quit doing that and am now wondering whether that's a key contributor to his much greater maturity (esp. with school) this year.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">2.) We're now making Zach set his own alarm on weekdays. He's always liked being tucked in and waken up. We've (largely) enjoyed it too. But again, I think we may have hurt his maturity by "babying" him to start each day.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Punchline: As parents, despite the best of loving intentions, what are we doing that blesses or semi-blesses or harms our children?&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Other anecdotes/ideas/thoughts?&nbsp;</span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-86911071053909427602015-01-07T10:25:00.000-05:002015-01-07T10:25:28.141-05:00“Rational” Ignorance Costly to Our Economic Health<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings></xml><![endif]--><br /><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:DoNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/> <w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/> <w:OverrideTableStyleHps/> </w:Compatibility> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="&#45;-"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="false" DefSemiHidden="false" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99" LatentStyleCount="371"> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toc 9"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footnote text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="header"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footer"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="index heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="table of figures"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="envelope address"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="envelope return"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="footnote reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="line number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="page number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="endnote reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="endnote text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="table of authorities"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="macro"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="toa heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Bullet 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Number 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Closing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Signature"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="List Continue 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Message Header"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Salutation"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Date"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text First Indent"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text First Indent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Note Heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Body Text Indent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Block Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Hyperlink"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="FollowedHyperlink"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Document Map"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Plain Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="E-mail Signature"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Top of Form"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Bottom of Form"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal (Web)"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Acronym"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Address"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Cite"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Code"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Definition"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Keyboard"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Preformatted"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Sample"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Typewriter"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="HTML Variable"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Normal Table"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="annotation subject"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="No List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Outline List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Simple 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Classic 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Colorful 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Columns 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Grid 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 7"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table List 8"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table 3D effects 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Contemporary"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Elegant"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Professional"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Subtle 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Subtle 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Web 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Balloon Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="Table Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Table Theme"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Placeholder Text"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" SemiHidden="true" Name="Revision"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" Name="Light List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" Name="Bibliography"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" SemiHidden="true" UnhideWhenUsed="true" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="41" Name="Plain Table 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="42" Name="Plain Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="43" Name="Plain Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="44" Name="Plain Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="45" Name="Plain Table 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="40" Name="Grid Table Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="Grid Table 1 Light Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="Grid Table 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="Grid Table 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="Grid Table 4 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="Grid Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="Grid Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="Grid Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 1"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 2"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 3"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 4"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 5"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="46" Name="List Table 1 Light Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="47" Name="List Table 2 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="48" Name="List Table 3 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="49" Name="List Table 4 Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="50" Name="List Table 5 Dark Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="51" Name="List Table 6 Colorful Accent 6"/> <w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="52" Name="List Table 7 Colorful Accent 6"/> </w:LatentStyles></xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]><style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:107%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style><![endif]--><i><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">This was published in newspapers across Indiana late last month. It will also appear in the next issue of the IPR Journal...</span></i><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">_____________ </span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">The use of government for economic “development” and economic “stimulus” is quite popular. Unfortunately, its popularity greatly exceeds what it deserves, given both theory and data.</span> <br /><div class="MsoPlainText"><br /></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">The theoretical reasons are easy to understand. In terms of economics, it is difficult for government to create net economic activity by moving money from one use to another. But in terms of political economy, the benefits of government spending are usually concentrated and obvious, while the costs of government spending are spread through the population and nearly invisible. Given this combination, one can confidently predict that government will be too active in attempts to foster economic growth.</span></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><br /></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">In any area of life, if you see the obvious — and miss larger but more subtle consequences — you’ll often end up with bad choices. Quite reasonably, most people spend little energy in thinking about public policy. When they combine this ignorance with naive views on political economy, they will tend to see the benefits of government activism and ignore its costs. Making it worse, members of the media often make the same mistakes. And of course, in the public arena, “interest groups” will tend to exaggerate benefits and downplay costs.</span></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><br /></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">Let me offer four reasons why economic development and stimulus will look better on paper than in reality.</span></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><br /></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">FIRST, the benefits are typically exaggerated. We’re often given a success story or two: Subsidy X led to “economic development” opportunity Z. Or we’re invited to imagine only the benefits: Giving taxpayer money to others will lead to more purchases which will stimulate the economy. From a few anecdotes, we imagine dozens of similar stories. But a few success stories do not necessarily imply many other success stories. And of course, the recipients of the money are likely to emphasize its benefits.</span></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><br /></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">SECOND, Henry Hazlitt’s “Lesson” teaches us to focus more intently on the subtle costs. In particular, how are we paying for government activism? Let’s say the government devotes $10 million for local “economic development.” How do politicians pay for this? First, they can increase taxes by $10 million, moving economic activity from the private sector to the public sector. How is this a net gain? Second, they can lower spending elsewhere, moving economic activity within the public sector. That’s a shell game. Third, they can borrow the $10 million, resulting in higher taxes down the road. Even in a best-case scenario, this will take prosperity from the future to finance the present.</span></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><br /></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">So, why do we imagine that government spending will routinely create net economic activity? Because it’s easier to see the economic activity of the $10 million in a few hands than to imagine that lower overall tax rates will do the same thing. It’s difficult to follow the government’s shell game when the benefits are obvious and the costs are nearly invisible.</span></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><br /></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">THIRD, the “Austrian Economics” school of thought focuses on “the knowledge problem.” Do government actors know enough to implement effective policy? With the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare), legislators famously bragged about not having read the bill. This sort of negligence is routine, especially with massive omnibus legislation. If a politicians haven’t read something, why should we trust their knowledge?</span></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><br /></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">But there’s a larger knowledge problem. For example, ObamaCare purports to know how to intervene in the markets for healthcare and health insurance at the federal level in a way that will improve outcomes. What are the odds that federal legislators will have enough general knowledge — and enough specific knowledge about people in various states and communities — to impact these markets positively? Mailing out checks and blowing up stuff is one thing, government is pretty good at those things. But manipulating healthcare and health insurance is quite another thing. In the context of economic development, what is the likelihood that government knows how to “pick winners” better than those spending their own money in the market?</span></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><br /></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">FINALLY, the “Public Choice Economics” school of thought focuses on incentives and motives within political markets. Will government actors be incentivized and motivated to do effective public policy? As we noted above, the media and especially the general public are not likely to be knowledgeable about the costs of public policy. What will interest groups and public policy do with their power and knowledge advantages?</span></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><br /></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">Jonathan Gruber was recently grilled for saying that voters are “stupid.” In contrast, a Public Choice economist would say that voters are “rationally ignorant” and apathetic. It’s not that voters are stupid. Instead, it’s simply not worth their energy to figure much out in the political realm. In other words, it’s “rational” to pay little attention to politics. Of course, interest groups and politicians might not take advantage of our ignorance. But even a casual observer of today’s politics will have at least the general sense that there’s more to political markets than benevolence and self-sacrifice.</span></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><br /></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif; font-size: 13.0pt;">What can we do as voters? We can stop believing in the tooth fairy and Santa Claus in political markets. Don’t let politicians promise you something for nothing — or entice you to play a shell game when you get easily distracted from following the ball.</span></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><br /></div><div class="MsoPlainText"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Eric Schansberg, Ph.D., an adjunct scholar of the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, is a professor of economics at Indiana University Southeast.</i></div>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-74906576658917075662015-01-06T10:32:00.001-05:002015-01-06T10:32:48.866-05:00Gaining Ground in the Pursuit of Happiness and Good Government<div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><i><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">This is the longer version of an essay that will appear in the IPR's journal; shorter versions appeared recently in newspapers across Indiana...<o:p></o:p></span></i></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><i><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></i></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Over the last 30 years, Charles Murray has been one of the most influential thinkers on domestic policy matters. Murray was trained as a sociologist, but has a terrific understanding of economics and political economy. His work is multi-disciplinary, readable, relevant, and often provocative.</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">This year marks a key anniversary for two of Murray’s books.&nbsp;<i>Losing Ground</i>is 30 years old now—and was&nbsp;<i>the</i>&nbsp;book on welfare programs in the 1980s. Quite controversial when published, the book's logic became the conventional wisdom on welfare policy within a decade.&nbsp;<i>In Pursuit of Happiness and Good Government</i>&nbsp;is 25 years old now—far less famous, but arguably a more powerful and potentially important book.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><b><i>Losing Ground</i></b><br /><br /><i>Losing Ground </i>(LG) came on the scene in 1984, at a time when conservatives were already bothered by various aspects of redistribution to the poor—in particular, the inherent disincentives for those receiving assistance. Murray's book bolstered those arguments and laid the groundwork for growing concerns about welfare over the next decade. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Most liberals were still largely enamored with the federal War on Poverty—and downplayed or dismissed Murray's arguments. Their concerns about welfare would emerge over the next decade—as they increasingly recognized that all was not well with the War. They were never as concerned about disincentives. Instead, they focused on other metrics, such as the impersonal, “dehumanizing” bureaucracy used to implement welfare.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">The thesis of LG is that welfare changed "the rules of the game" for those in the lower income classes. The “rules” had been changed by well-intentioned elites—and the response to those incentives and the outcomes of the War were not what had been hoped or expected. Four decades and more than a trillion dollars later, the poverty rate is similar and the problems of poverty are arguably worse. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">An easy way to see this: $20,000 per year in government benefits will be interpreted quite differently by those who can earn $30,000 or $80,000. The resulting disincentives for those with fewer means—to work, to get married, to save, etc.—discouraged many people from engaging in productive, long-term behaviors. This encouraged a cycle of poverty, undermining work ethic and family structure/stability. (Murray develops this theme more fully in his recent book, <i>Coming Apart</i>.<span style="line-height: 18.546667098999px;">&nbsp;<a href="http://www.marketsandmorality.com/index.php/mandm/article/view/871">Click here to see my review essay</a> on Murray's book and Harrington's classic, 50-year-old book on poverty.</span>)&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Of course, there's more to life than incentives and narrow understanding of economics. Other social changes also undermined family structure and stability, making things still worse. The results have not been pretty: lower labor-force participation for able-bodied males, dramatic increases in children in single-parent households, etc. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In 1996, federal welfare reform stifled some of the worst aspects of the original War on Poverty. States gained more control and were encouraged to experiment with policy design. This new freedom was attractive to states and almost certainly a better way to implement policy. On something as complex as welfare policy, trying 50 different things is almost certainly better than insisting on a single federal approach.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In particular, states were told to implement “time limits”—to lessen the damage to long-term incentives. And they were encouraged to use “categorization and discernment” in doling out benefits—distinguishing between the particular needs of those in poverty (e.g., job skills, transportation, child care). <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Although welfare policy continues to be problematic, <i>Losing Ground</i>’s work on welfare’s inherent disincentives still echoes over time. Hopefully, in the years to come, we will gain more ground than we’ve been losing. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><b><i>In Pursuit of Happiness and Good Government</i></b><b> <o:p></o:p></b></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">I learned about <i>In Pursuit of Happiness and Good Government</i>&nbsp;(IPHGG) through an article in <i>Reason</i>, leading up to the 1992 election. The editor asked a number of influential thinkers to recommend a book for the new president to read (whether Bush or Clinton). The most frequent choice was IPHGG—a book I had not even heard about. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">IPHGG has never been all that popular, because it talks about policy in broad terms. But its general approach is also what makes it so valuable. In a word, what are we trying to accomplish with public policy and what are the constraints in using government to achieve various ends?<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In IPHGG, Murray uses a modified version of Maslow’s hierarchy as his framework: material needs, safety, dignity/self-esteem, and self-actualization. Individuals have goals in each category. It follows that government policy should aim to be helpful—or at least to avoid harm—in each of those categories. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Murray notes that there are often trade-offs between the categories, especially with public policy. What if government policy makes a modest gain in one area, but at the expense of other goals? For example, the government might provide material support in a way that undermines dignity or self-actualization. This leads to vital but often overlooked questions about effective policy. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Murray also describes “thresholds” and “enabling conditions”. “Thresholds” are the minimal amounts of a category required to have a satisfying life. For example, one needs “enough” food, clothing, shelter, human relationships, etc.—to survive and at least minimally thrive. Reaching the thresholds is vital. Exceeding thresholds can certainly be an improvement, but on average, the gains are surprisingly modest. For example, people report similar levels of happiness whether they are barely above or far above threshold levels.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">“Enabling conditions” can be considered part of a government’s responsibility—setting up “conditions” that enable people to achieve happiness on their own terms. For example, government should help provide safety for its citizens; might provide material support up to a threshold for the indigent; and should broadly establish a general environment in which people can pursue dignity and self-actualization in their daily lives. Again, getting to thresholds is vital. Beyond that, government will not be able to accomplish nearly as much—and might easily interfere with the pursuit of happiness, given policy trade-offs. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">With a more thorough view of personal and policy goals, the possibility of trade-offs looms large. Early in the book, Murray conducts a thought experiment: If you and your spouse were to die, would you rather that your kids be raised by people in Thailand who have the thresholds in terms of material goods and safety—and completely share your values. Or would you rather have them raised by Americans who are wealthy but have troubling values? Most people would choose the former, implying that there’s much more to life and happiness than access to material standards of living. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Murray concludes with the role of what Edmund Burke called “little platoons”—the small, community-based groups (schools, churches, civic groups, etc.) in which we find much of our support, friendship, resources, etc. In little platoons, we’re more likely to find fulfillment and true help—not just for material goals but to pursue the higher ends for which we have been created. State and federal governments are not little platoons, but they play a vital role in establishing an environment in which little platoons can be effective. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><i>In Pursuit of Happiness and Good Government</i> continues to be a must-read for those who are interested in implementing (good) public policy. Murray doesn’t provide a ton of answers. But in the context of complex issues like personal happiness and public policy, asking good questions is at least half of the answer. If your New Year’s Resolutions include reading on public policy, put this book on the top of your list. <o:p></o:p></span></div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><span style="line-height: 107%;"><br clear="all" style="mso-special-character: line-break; page-break-before: always;" /></span> </span><br /><div class="MsoNormal"><br /></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Op-ed #1: Still Losing Ground?<o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Over the last 30 years, Charles Murray has been one of the most influential thinkers on domestic policy matters. Murray was trained as a sociologist, but has a terrific understanding of economics and political economy. His work is multi-disciplinary, readable, relevant, and often provocative. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">This year marks a key anniversary for two of Murray’s books.&nbsp;<i>Losing Ground</i>is 30 years old now—and was&nbsp;<i>the</i>&nbsp;book on welfare programs in the 1980s. Quite controversial when published, the book's logic became the conventional wisdom on welfare policy within a decade.&nbsp;<i>In Pursuit of Happiness and Good Government</i>&nbsp;is 25 years old now—far less famous, but arguably a more powerful and potentially important book.<br /><br />In the first piece of a two-part series, I’ll discuss the importance of <i>Losing Ground</i>. In the second piece, I’ll discuss <i>In Pursuit of Happiness and Good Government</i>. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><i>Losing Ground </i>(LG) came on the scene in 1984, at a time when conservatives were already bothered by various aspects of redistribution to the poor—in particular, the inherent disincentives for those receiving assistance. Murray's book bolstered those arguments and laid the groundwork for growing concerns about welfare over the next decade. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Most liberals were still largely enamored with the federal War on Poverty—and downplayed or dismissed Murray's arguments. Their concerns about welfare would emerge over the next decade—as they increasingly recognized that all was not well with the War. They were never as concerned about disincentives. Instead, they focused on other metrics, such as the impersonal, “dehumanizing” bureaucracy used to implement welfare.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">The thesis of LG is that welfare changed "the rules of the game" for those in the lower income classes. The “rules” had been changed by well-intentioned elites—and the response to those incentives and the outcomes of the War were not what had been hoped or expected. Four decades and more than a trillion dollars later, the poverty rate is similar and the problems of poverty are arguably worse. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">An easy way to see this: $20,000 per year in government benefits will be interpreted quite differently by those who can earn $30,000 or $80,000. The resulting disincentives for those with fewer means—to work, to get married, to save, etc.—discouraged many people from engaging in productive, long-term behaviors. This encouraged a cycle of poverty, undermining work ethic and family structure/stability. (Murray develops this theme more fully in his recent book, <i>Coming Apart</i>.)&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Of course, there's more to life than incentives and narrow understanding of economics. Other social changes also undermined family structure and stability, making things still worse. The results have not been pretty: lower labor-force participation for able-bodied males, dramatic increases in children in single-parent households, etc. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In 1996, federal welfare reform stifled some of the worst aspects of the original War on Poverty. States gained more control and were encouraged to experiment with policy design. This new freedom was attractive to states and almost certainly a better way to implement policy. On something as complex as welfare policy, trying 50 different things is almost certainly better than insisting on a single federal approach.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In particular, states were told to implement “time limits”—to lessen the damage to long-term incentives. And they were encouraged to use “categorization and discernment” in doling out benefits—distinguishing between the particular needs of those in poverty (e.g., job skills, transportation, child care). <o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 12.0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Although welfare policy continues to be problematic, <i>Losing Ground</i>’s work on welfare’s inherent disincentives still echoes over time. Hopefully, in the years to come, we will gain more ground than we’ve been losing.</span></div><div><div id="ftn1"> </div></div>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-76884533636139756692014-12-19T10:35:00.002-05:002014-12-19T10:35:57.897-05:00Steinbeck's "The Moon Is Down"<span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">Somehow, I hadn't heard about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moon_Is_Down">this book</a> until recently. An excellent, easy read; provocative on war as empire; rough on idealists, especially with respect to war; powerful on freedom vs. statism-- from both a community and individual perspective; strongly satirical and well-crafted in style. <br /><br />Favorite quotes:&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-"Doctor Winter was a man so simple that only a profound man would know him as profound...Joseph was elderly and lean and serious, and his life was so complicated that only a profound man would know him to be simple." (14-15)</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-"Tonder was a dark romantic with a vision as wide as his experience." (46)</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-"These were the men of the staff, each one playing war...Major Hunter thought of war as an arithmetical job to be done so he could get back to his fireplace. Captain Loft as the proper career of a properly brought-up young man; and Lieutenants Prackle and Tonder as a dreamlike thing in which nothing was very real. And their war so far had been play-- fine weapons and fine planning against unarmed, planless enemies...Only Colonel Lanser knew what war really is in the long run." (46-47)</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-"On nights like this, the feathered steel spindles came whistling down and roared to splinters." (148)</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-“They think that just because they have only one leader and one head, we are all like that. They know that ten heads lopped off will destroy them, but we are a free people; we have as many heads as we have people, and in a time of need leaders pop up among us like mushrooms.” (175)</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-“The people don't like to be conquered, sir, and so they will not be. Free men cannot start a war, but once it is started, they can fight on in defeat. Herd men, followers of a leader, cannot do that, and so it is always the herd men who win battles and the free men who win wars.”&nbsp; (185-186)</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">-And of course, the idea that “flies conquer the flypaper.”&nbsp; </span></span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-74023369635099069902014-12-15T10:15:00.005-05:002014-12-15T10:16:08.890-05:00is it easier to have had something and lose it?<div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; line-height: 19.3199996948242px; margin-bottom: 6px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">With respect to X (something of significant/profound value), is it more challenging to:&nbsp;</span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; line-height: 19.3199996948242px; margin-bottom: 6px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br />a.) not have had X; to know something of X and its value-- but&nbsp;<span style="line-height: 19.3199996948242px;">have no hope to have X</span></span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; line-height: 19.3199996948242px; margin-bottom: 6px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; line-height: 19.3199996948242px; margin-bottom: 6px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">b.) not have had X; to know something of X and its value-- and have hope for X but be routinely disappointed about X</span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; line-height: 19.3199996948242px; margin-bottom: 6px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">c.) have had X and to have lost it</span></div><div style="background-color: white; color: #141823; line-height: 19.3199996948242px; margin-bottom: 6px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">d.) have had X strongly and now to have a (far) weaker version of it</span></div><div class="text_exposed_show" style="background-color: white; color: #141823; display: inline; line-height: 19.3199996948242px;"><div style="margin-bottom: 6px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Does it depend on what X is--e.g.,&nbsp;<span style="color: black; line-height: normal;">power, freedom, money, sex, quality of life, etc.</span><span style="line-height: 19.3199996948242px;">?</span><span style="line-height: 19.3199996948242px;">&nbsp;</span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><span style="line-height: 19.3199996948242px;"><br /></span></span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 6px;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Discuss.</span></div></div>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-50295909352617635932014-11-17T13:14:00.003-05:002014-11-17T13:14:59.145-05:00Truth vs. Logic<span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;">Peter Leithart (in Touchstone﻿): </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"></span><br /><span style="color: blue; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"><em>"Truthful" implies "logical", since a fully truthful person will not contradict at noon what he said over breakfast. Still, truth and logic are not the same. </em></span><br /><span style="color: blue; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"><em></em></span><br /><span style="color: blue; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"><em>Truthful men and women don't contradict themselves, but they don't simply repeat themselves either. To speak truthfully is not simply to speak timeless p's and q's. A truthful person's speech fits the circumstances. To be truthful is to be timely. </em></span><br /><span style="color: blue; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"><em></em></span><br /><span style="color: blue; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"><em>Truthfulness is judged differently than logic.&nbsp; A statement is logical if it meets criterion of intellectual consistency, but the test of truth is pragmatic.&nbsp; A truthful person keeps commitments.</em></span><br /><span style="color: blue; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"><em></em></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"><em><span style="color: blue;">God is "Truth", not "Logic". He speaks a word in season, and the ultimate proof of his truthfulness is his performance of his promises. The ultimate proof of divine Truth is the Cross.</span></em> </span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-5517669023184307612014-11-17T12:45:00.000-05:002014-11-17T12:45:01.647-05:00Walden Two<span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;">I don't remember why I picked&nbsp;up B.F. Skinner's novel from the library. (Something prompted me, but I've gotten rid of it.) I started to read it last week and almost stopped after a few chapters. Then, I decided to keep going, but at a quicker pace. (I didn't skim it, but I didn't study it thoroughly either. Hopefully, I have a strong sense of what Skinner was trying to convey. If not, let me know!) </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;">Walden Two (WT) is an effort to describe a utopia-- a form of communal living based on an extension of Thoreau's individualistic Walden. Skinner's Utopia emphasizes science, progress and efficiency. And it relies on an interesting combination of&nbsp;assumptions about the power of social influences and the general benevolence of internal motivations. (It&nbsp;then applies those assumptions to governance&nbsp;and everyday life in WT.) </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;">Skinner believed in the power of social norms and rules-- and saw them as useful&nbsp;to tweak flaws in human character toward conformity with universal standards. Near the beginning, Frazier (the leader / tour guide) explains the use of electric fences initially-- but eventually, merely, string--&nbsp;to constrain sheep from wandering. The inference from the analogy is that people (are sheep who) can be influenced by external rules and norms, but require less and less of that as they are conditioned. Of course, in practice and even in theory, this would be a tough cycle to establish:&nbsp;How do&nbsp;benevolent, knowledgeable elites emerge who know how to construct these rules ably and with pure motives? </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;">More broadly, WT is Genesis 2 without Genesis 3-- Eden without the Fall (at least, yet). It's Acts 1-4 without Acts 5-6-- the beauty of the early church without its first warts. It's Revelation 21-22 with at most a deistic God-- Heaven as city and Eden&nbsp;without the (overt/relevant) presence of God. </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;">WT is also reminiscent of Acts 2 and 4 in that it advocates a voluntary, small-scale "socialism". Not socialism of the usual earthly/worldly sort-- coercive/governmental and large-scale, with the attendant ethical and practical problems (riddled with crony capitalism, motive problems and profound information limits). Instead, Skinner portrays&nbsp;socialism of a beautiful and other-worldly sort-- say, in a Sunday School class that has vibrant community and ministers to its own. </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;">One key difference: the socialism of WT is largely insular, whereas the socialism of&nbsp;a Sunday School class should be communal in a far larger sense. I did not catch whether Skinner would casually conflate the two. One troubling sign is that he dismisses the (small-scale) family structure from a primary (although not universal) role-- in favor of a fully-communal structure to raise children (as the caricatures of "It takes a village").</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;">I was struck that his governance structure was quite similar to the New Testament church as well. His leadership structure is elders and deacons. It relies on a "benevolent dictator"-- with the main character Frazier in the god-like role. (Politically,&nbsp;Skinner is appropriately rough on democracy!) </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;">But it's not clear how far Frazier's benevolence extends-- and where Skinner intends to leave us with all of this. One of those on the "tour" is cynical about Frazier's motives-- and Frazier certainly comes off as a bit creepy in terms of the "control" he exerts. (Or maybe we've just been conditioned to be unnecessarily cynical?) Another clue is that elders/Planners have a ten-year term limit which was not yet become binding. Two concerns here: 1.) Would Frazier (and the others) step down at the appointed time or find/seek loopholes? 2.) Why a term limit at all? Its existence points to implied concerns about what power could do to someone.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;">Skinner vaguely praises Christianity and sees favorable parallels. I didn't catch whether he was (quite) hostile to "organized religion"; he seems to see it as at least potentially innocuous or even beneficial. Frazier argues that Christianity has rarely been tried/seen (p. 281). But this&nbsp;overlooks/ignores its innumerable (but more subtle) successes to focus on its failures. Ironically, by the same metric, one would&nbsp;reject utopias out-of-hand far more easily-- surely, not what Frazier means (perhaps&nbsp;Skinner intends this ironically). </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;"></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; font-size: large;">Frazier praises progress throughout-- and details gains in progress and efficiency. Of course, one of the&nbsp;funny things about progress is that one admits not having done it as well in the past. Utopia here is, very much,&nbsp;a work in progress. One wonders whether the likelihood of past flaws in other areas-- say, governance-- would undermine the entire project. To note, if Frazier and the elders are not perfect in their governance from the outset, does the entire project fall apart because of their well-intentioned mistakes? <br /><br />As one would hope from a portrayal of a utopia, Skinner's book is helpful in that it calls us to dream but also to be realistic, to be idealistic but not be a dupe, to compare what we have to what we might have instead. </span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-88623675530403729582014-11-11T12:44:00.000-05:002014-11-11T12:44:04.491-05:00"If the biggest sinner you know isn't you, then you don't know yourself very well."<span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">"If the biggest sinner you know isn't you, then you don't know yourself very well."</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /> -- John Larroux (h/t: Kyle) </span></span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-68419321134343724652014-11-06T16:41:00.000-05:002014-11-06T16:41:04.039-05:00review of "The Humane Vision of Wendell Berry"<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">I've read snippets of Wendell Berry here and there. But I haven't really read his work enough to say anything useful. Now, I've read a good chunk *about* him-- through <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Humane-Vision-Wendell-Berry/dp/1610170016/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1415305385&amp;sr=1-1-fkmr1&amp;keywords=mitchell+humane+economy+berry">a volume edited by Mark Mitchell and Nathan Schlueter</a>. And I now feel modestly equipped to engage Berry-- at least indirectly-- through the eyes of others who care about him and respect his approach. (For the record, I would <i>not</i> feel comfortable if it was critics writing about him!)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In addition to being a strong thinker, Berry is an effective and well-respected writer-- and in a number of mediums:&nbsp;poetry (see: Luke Schlueter's ch. 15), non-fiction, essay, short story, and&nbsp;novel. I'm still not sure how much I'll read him, but I'm more impressed after reading the Mitchell/Schlueter volume and now more likely to pick up one of Berry's novels.</span><br /><div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">An overview</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">I've been impressed by Berry from afar-- given what other respectable people have said about him. It seems clear that he's a&nbsp;thinker on&nbsp;topics that are important to me:&nbsp;from politics to society, economy to environment, religion to business. His approach is impressive:&nbsp;holistic in his interests and generally strong in terms of his analysis-- a broad and thorough sense of (more subtle) costs and benefits. He avoids reductionism of complex personal choices and social phenomena. He avoids univariate analysis and lame statistics.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">And to his immense credit, Berry has lived out what he professes, including a number of what outsiders might easily see as (net) sacrifices. Berry left a nice job as a professor to operate a farm, live in a small community, and focus on his writing. (In this, I'm reminded of Ron Sider who wrote a popular but incoherent book on Christianity and economics, <i>Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger</i>. Later editions of the book were improved, as Sider read and listened to those who knew more about economics and the Bible. Sider should be commended for his biblical focus on justice and wanting to find what God says about defining and dealing with injustice. Perhaps most important, Sider descended from the ivory tower of academe to live among those he wants to help.)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">There is much in Berry which is difficult to define, to put in a box. In that, I feel a kinship with him. I'd imagine that we share the same freedom in avoiding boxes-- and not feeling a need to defend so many worldly institutions. But I'd guess we share the same frustration at others (often fundamentalists) who insist on seeing the world in rigid boxes and then putting us (incorrectly) into boxes.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">The editors open: "Although Berry is often associated with the political Left, it is our conviction that his work is profoundly conservative", given his avid support for "decentralization, a robust civil society, respect for tradition, hostility to the welfare state, and opposition to abortion, promiscuity and divorce." (p. x; see also: D.G. Hart's ch. 10) In Wallace Stegner's public letter to Berry (used as a prologue in this volume), he notes that Berry's "books seem conservative [but] they are actually profoundly revolutionary." (4)</span><br /><div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">"Berry, however, is more than the sum of his positions on the issues." (p. x.) He cannot be claimed by any one camp and is often insistent on avoiding labels. "The work of Wendell Berry resists any system that might be imposed upon it." (92) He "stands against all isms that would reduce the whole to one of its parts or dissolve all of the parts into one universal whole. He is for piety against pietism, intellect against intellectualism, individuality against individualism, community against communitarianism, liberty against libertarianism." (xiii)</span></div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Berry "has a public record of cooperating with those who fight for causes he himself fights for..." (50) But "distrustful of movements and organizations, Berry has tended to go his own way..." (50) In particular, he's avoided the environmentalist camp (see: chapter 6, esp. p. 50-54), even criticizing it-- as focusing on effects rather than causes (51), using misleading terms (e.g., "environment"-- as if it can be separated from us; or "conservation" for its unanswered question-begging about what is to be conserved), and relying on arguments that are reductionist, materialist, and dualist.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Each of the authors in the edited volume discuss a particular theme in Berry's writings. Much&nbsp;of the book is devoted to themes connected to economics, politics, and political economy. But again, Berry's larger social concerns are within and surrounding those discussions.&nbsp;</span><br /><div><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Berry on Government, Governance, and Politics</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">His general approach to politics (Patrick Deneen and Rod Dreher in chs. 7, 17) is the same: he is critical of "the partisan alignment of contemporary politics" and "eschews inevitably narrowing involvement in specific movements" (73). He is "mistrustful of narrowly conceived political 'solutions' to problems that he understands to transcend the normal approaches of politics." (74)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Most of his vision of government is negative; he presents "no positive vision of formal mediating institutions" (228), including government. In&nbsp;Port William, his most prominent fictional setting, there is no local government-- and outside government serves only to disrupt or destroy some aspect of the common good (228).&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">With the (surprising) absence of other mediating institutions (e.g., the church), Nathan Schlueter (ch. 14) describes Berry's vision as "rational anarchy" where culture and community are "established and preserved purely on the basis of cooperation and consent" without (formal) political or religious institutions. (228)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Schlueter observes that this seems to fly in the face of Berry's usual critique of romanticism. But Schlueter concludes that Berry is describing an Edenic/ideal state rather than&nbsp;an idyllic/realistic state. "The idyllic imagination is based upon a false understanding of human nature itself; it is not only impossible, it is unimaginable" for those with a more realistic understanding of human nature (229). In contrast, Berry's Edenic vision hearkens to "our deeper, our truer selves" (229). "Eden therefore provides the imaginative ground for making sense of man's fallen, historical state. More important, it keeps alive in the midst of history what is truest about human beings and their relationship to nature and to God." Moreover, Port William is not even remotely Edenic as Berry depicts work, marriage and family (231).</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Similarly, Berry sounds downright libertarian and Pauline/evangelical when talking about the importance of self-governance: "Free men are not set free by their government; they have set their government free of themselves...It is a matter of discipline. A person can free himself of bondage that has been imposed on him only by accepting another bondage that he has chosen. A man who would not be the slave of other men must be the master of himself-- that is the real meaning of self government. If we all behaved as honorably and honestly and industriously as we expect our representatives to behave, we would soon put the government out of work. A person dependent on somebody else for everything from potatoes to opinions may declare that he is a free man, and his government may issue a certificate granting him his freedom, but he will not be free...Men are free precisely to the extent that they are equal to their own needs. The most able are the most free." (88)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">He takes a similar angle with pacifism (see: Michael Stevens' ch. 9), describing a protest that is more private than public-- to "live in protest" (113). This reminds me of counter-culturalism in general and Christian variants in particular. To abstain from "worldly" practices-- whether biblical-morality examples such as divorce or sex outside of marriage or biblical-practical, context-specific examples such as alcohol, home-schooling, one-income married households, and consumerism-- is to live in quiet but presumably effective protest against the World system.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Another angle on these "private" decisions: without enough of them, markets and governance become intractable. For example, if people want to live dishonestly, then all of the legal and market constraints in the world will not be effective. If people want pursue unhealthy lifestyles, neither the current dog's breakfast of government regulations and subsidies-- nor various efforts at reform (whether more or less government)-- will be effective. But the converse also holds: if men are angels, then much of both the need for governance and concerns about governance become superfluous.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Marriage, Family and Education</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Anne Burleigh discusses marriage (ch. 2). Berry does not see marriage as (purely) "private" given its immense connections to the well-being of children, witnessed by and responsible to a community, crucial to a country and civilization. Berry also talks about the importance of fidelity in marriage-- and of course, fidelity in one area of life will be related to fidelity in other areas of life.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Allan Carlson has a related chapter (3) on a Berry essay called "Rugged Individualism"-- which takes to task both the Right and the Left on the rugged individualism of their views on property and the human body (20). As Carlson notes, "the comedy begins when these extreme forms of individualism meet." The Right celebrates family values but ignores advertising, materialism and ungainly profit. The Left sees sin as a private matter and defends the environment-- while focusing on material needs and ignoring human communities and broken families (21). On abortion, Berry notes that "If you can control your own body only by destroying another person's body, then control has come much too late." (24) And he sees it as "the most primitive form of warfare" (117). He is also critical of the (now-largely-archaic) idea of "over-population", asking "who are the surplus?" (26)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Richard Gamble (ch. 4) discusses Berry on education. Not surprisingly, Berry is highly critical of busing, given what it does to neighborhood and community. "There can be no greater blow to the integrity of a community than the loss of its school or loss of control of its school-- which always means loss of control of its children." (34) Of course, there are strong arguments against busing-- from a negative view (what are the ethics and practical results?) and from an individual basis (harm done to individual families/children, including those it purports to help-- as in Louisville with the case eventually overturned by the Supreme Court). But Berry's arguments are strictly communal and quite compelling. (Berry is also critical of higher ed, saying that the only serious "major" in college is "upward mobility" [37].)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Food and the Environment</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Matt Bonzo discusses food-- and indirectly, the environment-- in chapter 5. He notes Berry's&nbsp;full-blooded sense of Genesis 2's call to "dominion": "The land has a story...And when the soil does give forth...the appropriate response is to give thanks because you have not so much manipulated or controlled the land for your purposes as learned to cooperate with the land." (42) </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Moreover, this extends to consumers who should "eat responsibly", realizing that we play an integral "role&nbsp;in the economy of food": "Parallel to the farmer's intellectual work is the partaker's work of selecting, cooking,&nbsp;and eating her food."&nbsp;(43). Instead, often, "we treat farm animals as future processed meat products" (46). (See: <a href="http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=15-02-036-f">Killheffer in <i>First Things</i></a> for an excellent essay on a Christian approach to animals rights.)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">The broader context: "If nature is viewed as indifferent or even hostile to human flourishing, one will approach it as an adversary to overcome...conquering nature for the relief of man's estate and the consumerist economy will closely follow. If, on the other hand, human beings are part of a nature that has an intrinsic value, then human beings much learn to live humbly and even joyfully within these limits." (224)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Jason Peters discusses the environment more directly in chapter 6. Here,&nbsp;we see Berry criticizing the environmental movement for its materialism, consumerism, and&nbsp;for&nbsp;ignoring constraints as if we can have "everything we want and a clean environment" (55). He blasts their frequent hypocrisy: they "want governments and other people to do something...[but have] no real interest in getting serious about their economic lives or reducing their standards of living." (55) He ridicules the&nbsp;"hybrid-driving environmentalist"; he wonders about environmentalists who don't at least garden; and he trashes the corn-for-ethanol-versus-food policy&nbsp;(58). With these critiques, it all seems a bit much; one wonders if Berry is himself aware of the&nbsp;constraints and trade-offs that individuals face. But surely he is right in noting the irony that those on the Left often want to externalize costs onto others, rather than internalizing them. </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Technology</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In chapter 8, Caleb Stegall discusses technology and the frequent drive for efficiency and profit maximization. His fictional contrast of corporate farmer Bill Meikelberger and an Amishman is powerful (90-91). Berry doesn't trash technology, per se, but instead notes that "utility, freedom and membership" can all be diminished or enhanced by our tools (94). As such,&nbsp;he asks "whether any particular tool making and using represents a dismemberment or...a profound amplification of what it means to be human." (93) </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In this, Berry is on solid ground, by asking provocative and important questions whether then providing sure, dogmatic, legalistic answers. (As I've often said, asking the right questions is more than half of "the right answer". And Berry seems more focused on questions than "answers".) He believes that a pencil is better than a word processor (95) and,&nbsp;more compelling,&nbsp;that a scythe is better for small-scale lawn-keeping than the far-more-popular alternatives, given its quietness&nbsp;(97). He eschews horsepower for horse, but is&nbsp;not a "pure" Luddite&nbsp;(whatever that would be), seeing the farm horse "as a conduit for magnifying what is human" (98).</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">I really enjoyed Stegall's&nbsp;next-to-last paragraph (105): "Man was made for tools. Man was made to magnify himself and his maker in his maker's gift to this world.&nbsp;But man was not made to be a tool; neither to make of himself a tool for his own greed and pleasure, nor for him to be made a tool by others for their greed and pleasure. Berry says, walk with me and I'll teach you the difference. The difference between a Weedwacker and a scythe; between a pixel of light and a stick of lead; between horsepower and a horse; between a hook and a hand [from his fiction]; between a living death and the death that is life."</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Economics and the Market</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In Chapter 11,&nbsp;Mark Shiffman provides an&nbsp;intro to economics as <i>oikonomia</i>-- decisions within a household,&nbsp;a term first used by Plato and Zenophon and defined precisely by Aristotle (148).&nbsp;The concept of the household supersedes the idea of purely individualistic decision-making; all decisions&nbsp;have public (and often,&nbsp;extended-private) implications. Likewise, economics is a "social science"-- with all this entails. Christian thinkers would later contribute&nbsp;the similar ideas of&nbsp;"sphere sovereignty" (Kuyper /&nbsp;Protestant) and "subsidiarity" (Catholic)-- in a word, the idea of different levels of responsibility and (ideal) autonomy, starting with the household.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Shiffman also notes that the first English use of the word "economy" comes from Hobbes in <i>Leviathan</i>, turning it into a non-household concept&nbsp;and envisioning the household and the family as an artificial construct (152-153)! (As an aside, Shiffman narrows the field of economics to money terms and then complains about his own reductionism. "Economics claims to be a neutral player in human moral life and in our human self-understanding, but...by default has to measure and compare in terms of value, which ultimately means by the medium of money." [155] Huh?)&nbsp; </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In chapter 12,&nbsp;Mark Mitchell lays out&nbsp;what he sees as Berry's defense of "a truly free market"-- within Berry's critique of "market ideology", a corporate (often crony) capitalism, and a "modern industrial economy [that] is anti-human, anti-community, and unsustainable." (167)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Given his concerns, Berry says we should not "delegate responsibility to organizations about which we know very little" (168). As a consumer, this is difficult and personally costly-- and if lived out consistently within an economy, has its own social costs in the [localized] monopoly power that would often obtain.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">As an investor, Berry is critical of portfolio diversification (e.g., mutual funds) that removes us from understanding the entities in which we invest (170). "The very scale and remoteness of the enterprise makes careful monitoring difficult" (170-171). This is a valid concern, but such a limited investment strategy would dry up opportunities for even local businesses.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Still, he is right to be concerned about market transactions where "the personal connection is gone" and "our relationship is stripped down merely to market forces" (169) "We have become, by and large, a nation of wage earners and the owners of mutual funds." (181)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In terms of public policy, Berry critiques government regulation for its usual favoritism toward large-scale vs. small-scale enterprise-- sometimes implicit but other times through cynical lobbying that restricts competition (171). As a result, "economic centralization and political centralization feed off one another. Far from being antagonistic, they are natural allies." (174)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Berry critiques "the universalization of competition" since it "divides rather than unites" (186). But this ignores the cooperation inherent in economic markets. Ironically, producers compete with other producers-- for the opportunity to cooperate with consumers. Moreover, the extreme opposite of competition is monopoly-- which presents a false unity. Perhaps we should invoke Babel here as a critique of Berry's view: the odd thing is that the messiness of competitive markets is preferable-- philosophically and practically-- to the alternative of significant monopoly power for producers.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Berry worries that competition "creates nomadic wage seekers" and "destroys community" (186). But there is no necessary relationship between competition, markets, and such outcomes. To the extent that such results obtain, it is a function of the underlying preferences of individuals whose values are somewhere between out-of-whack and what Berry envisions.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Likewise, Mitchell quotes Berry on "the ideal of unlimited competition" as "proposes an unlimited concentration of economic power" (186-187). This misunderstands competition and relies on an incoherent definition of "power". Further, it ignores the alternative-- "limited" competition, typically through government policies that benefit interest groups at the expense of society.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Still, Berry has a point: markets differ when they operate "within a broader framework of social, moral, and religious commitments where the virtues are inculcated and practiced." (187-188) Mitchell cites Wilhelm Roepke (174, 187), who is very helpful on these questions. (For my review of Roepke's <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Humane-Economy-Social-Framework-Market/dp/1882926242/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1415208778&amp;sr=1-2&amp;keywords=humane+economy+roepke"><i>A Humane Economy</i></a>, see: <a href="http://www.acton.org/sites/v4.acton.org/files/pdf/rl_v09n3.pdf">p. 13-14 of this link</a>).</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Local vs. Global, and Mutually Beneficial Trade</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">A clearer problem: Berry and other localists can be downright silly on "local trade". Ironically, at least for Berry, the analysis is typically reductionistic. And its application is typically incoherent: how local can one buy and sell products and services? Why should "local" producers purchase inputs from outside the locality? Berry does ask, reasonably, whether there "should be other considerations in addition to price", asking "Is there a price to focusing only upon price" (186). But how does one apply the principle, consistently or at least, well?</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Berry saw "global free trade" as more troubling than terrorism post-9/11 (116). Pre-9/11, he said that "what we call 'the economy' or 'the free market' is less and distinguishable from warfare" (117). (Perhaps he meant crony capitalism, but it seems doubtful.) Berry imagines that "family-owned concerns" are "forced to shut their doors" (185).&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">William Fahey's ch. 13 extends the point further in drawing connections to the "distributionists" (including most prominently, G.K. Chesterton, and the C-J's London correspondent, Herbert Agar [194]). Fahey (209): "The localism of the distributists and Wendell Berry is not separation; it is rather a traditional framing of the social life of man.". I think I understand what he means, but how far does this extend? When does localism become provincialism?&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Fahey frames his essay with a fascinating example of a local apple festival in New Hampshire using "non-local" apples from New York. What is a local apple festival intended to celebrate? To what extent should the apples and the relevant labor come from X miles away? To what extent would local consumers have been willing to pay higher prices (or accept lower quality) from more-local apples?</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Economists find all of this a bit odd, at least in our politically correct times. Our first model for these sorts of decisions is discrimination-- when people use criteria other than "productivity" to make decisions. Here, localists would ask consumers to discriminate against non-locals and exhibit favoritism for locals. One can certainly make a case for such behavior, but it's an odd calling in a time when we are generally encouraged to avoid such approaches to decision-making. </span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Haley is correct in citing Chesterton on the potential for reductionism within market activity-- that "a system based entirely on the division of labor is in one sense literally half-witted. That is, each performer of half an operation does really only use half of his wits." In contrast, the self-sufficient peasant (such as he really is) lives "not merely a simple life, but a complete life." (205) Then again, this too is oversold. One imagines that the husband/wife peasant pairs-- and others within the community-- engage in their own forms of specialization in comparative advantages, engaging in trade.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">An "Integral Imagination"</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In chapter 14, Nathan Schlueter describes Berry's "integral imagination"-- an integrated, holistic approach to thinking through worldview and everyday life. If God, life, society, etc. are complex matters, then why would one imagine that reductionism is a sane outlook. Reductionism certainly has its place in understanding life-- for example, through models and statistics-- but the reductions should never be conflated or confused with the whole. Schlueter cites Machiavelli's criticism of imagination, but the fundamental issue is whether one's imagination is real or unreal-- or the extent to which it is true to "reality".&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Adding to the confusion, we moderns imagine that imagination has been relegated to a back seat by our modern ways and our modern ways of thinking. Instead, "imagination plays a more powerful role in our lives than ever before, yet we are largely unaware of this fact. Modern science thus conceals its own poetic ground." (214) One sees this in those who imagine that evolution provides a comprehensive explanation for the development of life as we see it today. But the extent of the "explanation" is exceedingly modest, infinitesimal compared to what would be required to "explain" the infinite number of steps from A to Z. Instead, these harder-core evolutionists have embraced a scientifically-flavored story, a scientific skin stuffed with a narrative.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Related to this, Mitchell (177) points to an "optimistic view of the future that marks the modern mind". As a result, "such a person is alienated from the present as well as the past. The past was, after all, a backward place inhabited by benighted, miserable wretches. What could they teach us?"&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Schlueter observes: "The result is a culture deeply divided between science without poetry (i.e., scientism) and poetry without intellect (e.g., romanticism)." (214) In this, we have returned to the ever-seductive dualism of mind and body, as we try to separate the head and heart and end up with an unhealthy combination of dreamers and fundamentalists-- both of many and varied stripes. "Romanticism and modern science share a preoccupation with the new, and hostility for the old and for tradition." (216) Meanwhile, religious fundamentalists embrace tradition without poetry. Neither position is impressive.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">On the limits of politics</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">In chapter 17, Rod Dreher depicts Berry as a "latter-day" St. Benedict and compares him at length to Alasdair MacIntyre. Dreher quotes the final paragraph of MacIntyre's <i>After Virtue</i>, referring to it as "the Benedict Option" (283). MacIntyre praises the decision to quit "shoring up the Roman imperium" and identifying "the continuation of civility and moral community with" its maintenance. Instead, the Benedictines focused on "the construction of new forms of community within which the moral life could be sustained...[to] survive the coming ages of barbarism and darkness." MacIntyre calls for the same thing today-- and is echoed in this by Berry and Dreher.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Dreher notes that "the Benedictine order more or less saved European civilization in the Dark Ages." Dreher points to their stability, laying down roots in community, as the key: "Peasants knew that the monks were not going to abandon their posts, or them, come what may. So they settled near the monasteries and learned from the monks. Over many generations, those monasteries became towns and great cities...the monks stayed and bore witness. In so doing, they showed a lost and scattered people how to be more fully human. In a time of great chaos, their decision to remain fixed points converted and saved an entire culture. Such is the power of a creative minority." (286)</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">A negative assessment of contemporary culture and politics leads to the same prescription-- that culture is struggling and both major political parties are somewhere between unimpressive and eminently self-serving. On economic policy, at least at the federal level, crony capitalism is common and the most impressive part of our approach to such things. Meanwhile, key issues are ignored and social policy is mostly for scoring cheap rhetorical points. Berry says they are "helplessly subservient to each other's rhetoric" and "have now become so self-righteous and self-defensive as to have no social use" (275). And that was back in 1970!&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">MacIntyre advises the rejection of politics "not primarily because they give us the wrong answers, but because they answer the wrong questions" (281). From Dreher: "Conventional politics is a weak bet for the kind of cultural reformation adequate to the crisis." (281) In other words, politics is not adequate to the task. Or from Berry, both culture and politics are jacked-up and politics is limited in its effectiveness; his "critical insight [is] that we have disordered politics because we have disordered souls." (284)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><b><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">On humility...</span></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">One closing thought: Over time, our amazing ignorance has become an increasingly important theme to me. It's a key within economics-- undergirding the existence of entrepreneurs, the cause of significant problems in some markets, and pointing to the limits of public policy. It's also a key to a variety of other issues-- e.g., our faith-filled interpretations of historical events and the staggering gap between what we have in hand and what we need for anything approaching a comprehensive explanation for the development of life. (Many people want/need/imagine that Evolution of this larger sort has moved much beyond pure narrative.)&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: large;">Berry notes that our ignorance should lead to humility. People should "learn to act with respect for what they do not know." Berry calls this recognition "the way of ignorance" and says it is "born of wonder, expressed in reverence, and rooted in faith." (xii) and is based on an "awareness of our limits" (218). May we follow in his path-- worried more about asking good questions than finding airtight answers; looking at life holistically rather than reductionistically; seeking to partner with Creation and others to make the world a better place and to walk humbly with our God. &nbsp;</span>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8241505550351823820.post-67897522277097936442014-10-28T12:00:00.003-04:002014-10-28T12:00:43.504-04:00ACA and college students<span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.thestarpress.com/story/opinion/contributors/2014/09/13/obamacare-tale-four-students/15481341/">Here is my op-ed with Linda Christiansen</a>. (It inspired <a href="http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/19280/">this blurb</a> and then, <a href="http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/19844/">this essay</a> which cited <a href="http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/19847/">a list of [at least] 122 colleges</a> impacted by the ACA-- a nice bit of investigative reporting...)</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">_________________________</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">This is a story about four college students who have similar family situations. Whatever the intention of politicians, all four were harmed by the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as "ObamaCare."</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Student No. 1</b> is a young graduate student still fully covered by both parents' health-insurance plans. He works as a graduate assistant (five hours per week for a small tuition discount and a little more than the minimum wage). He also is enrolled in the university's health insurance with no premium payments. He now has redundant insurance coverage from three plans. Surely, the university sees those premiums as part of his compensation. He derives no benefit from their health plan, however, and does not have the option to be paid more money instead. This is a lose-lose situation since the employer is paying an expense that the employee would prefer as cash.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Student No. 2 </b>is an undergraduate putting himself through college and covered by his father's health insurance. He works as a resident's assistant (RA) helping in the dorms to pay his room and board. He was also working in the campus Internet Technology (IT) department. This is his major so it offered both compensation and relevant work experience. But because of ObamaCare's requirement to provide health insurance for those working more than 30 hours per week, the university forced him to choose between the two jobs. Since his RA job was so important to his current living costs, he dropped his IT job despite its value for his future.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Student No. 3</b> also is an RA with health insurance through both parents. The university requires RAs to report their work hours each week — to stay under the ObamaCare mandate on hours worked. Yet, during the weeks before classes she is "required" to work long days with no off days for training or student move-in — even though those hours are not counted for the purposes of ObamaCare.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Student No. 4</b> attended college for a while but decided to work and take time to think about what he would like to do in the future. He works part-time for a grocery chain and wants to work full-time. Although management thinks he is an excellent employee and might have a fine career with the company, they could not offer him more hours since the company can only afford a few full-time employees. In the meantime, he is covered by his parents' insurance.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">All of these are perverse and largely-ignored consequences of ObamaCare. None of these students needs health insurance but all of them have been penalized by the legislation.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">We see the same sort of outcomes throughout the economy. Three surveys by the Federal Reserve branches in Philadelphia, New York and Atlanta indicated remarkably consistent results: About 20 percent of firms are cutting jobs; 20-30 percent are shifting jobs to part-time; and about 20 percent are shifting higher insurance costs to employees.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">From the employee's perspective, a recent National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) paper by Casey Mulligan indicates that 6 million-11 million workers can increase their disposable incomes by reducing their work hours.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">Thanks to ObamaCare, there are many more contexts in which working less — and hiring people to work fewer hours — has become financially attractive. Aside from the amazingly slow pace of the economic recovery by historical standards, all of this also explains why we've had so much growth in part-time work and so little in full-time work.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">The government has been heavily manipulating the markets for health care and health insurance for decades — subsidizing insurance through the workplace, restricting health care and health-insurance options, giving away a lot of "free" health care and so on.</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">ObamaCare did nothing to reduce the problems created earlier by the government. Instead, in its attempt to help some people, it extended those problems and added new ones — by multiplying and complicating the links between health insurance, work and family.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: Times,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">When we use unwieldy federal legislation to manipulate a complex, messed-up system, it's not surprising that the results are a very mixed bag.</span></span><br /><br /><i>Linda Christiansen is a professor of business at Indiana University Southeast in New Albany; D. Eric Schansberg is a professor of economics there and an adjunct scholar for the Indiana Policy Review Foundation. </i>Eric Schansberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16147388189415035752noreply@blogger.com0